PDA

View Full Version : Please Help Leaven Parable



Brad1978
Oct 18th 2009, 06:20 PM
Hi I'm new to the forum,and I have a question.

What's the true meaning of the leaven parable?

One person told me it concerns sin. Just alittle bit of sin causes more sin.

Another person said it was like the gospel being preached in the world being planted in their hearts slowly growing getting bigger and bigger.

I read in the bible leaven is used to describe something bad. Like when Jesus told his disciples to beware the leaven of the pharisees.

Which is correct?

Thank you for your help

Brad

Sirus
Oct 18th 2009, 09:29 PM
leaven is always corruption
Luk 13:18 Then said he, Unto what is the kingdom of God like? and whereunto shall I resemble it?
Luk 13:19 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and cast into his garden; and it grew, and waxed a great tree; and the fowls of the air lodged in the branches of it.
Luk 13:20 And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God?
Luk 13:21 It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
What are fowls in ALL parables according to Jesus?
Mar 4:4 And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the fowls of the air came and devoured it up.

Mar 4:13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?
Mar 4:14 The sower soweth the word.
Mar 4:15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.
Satan

The word of God (gospel) was corrupted in the days of the apostles.
2Co 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
Jesus and the apostles said this would happen. It is no surprise. There is nothing in scripture to contradict 'the church' going after false doctrine til finally reaching apostasy. There is really no legitimate way to conclude an irresistible ever increasing glorious Church throughout the age.

Question: Look at Church History. Did the Church become the greatest of trees through the doctrine of Christ/Apostles, or through corruption? :idea:

crossnote
Oct 18th 2009, 09:37 PM
Hi I'm new to the forum,and I have a question.

What's the true meaning of the leaven parable?

One person told me it concerns sin. Just alittle bit of sin causes more sin.

Another person said it was like the gospel being preached in the world being planted in their hearts slowly growing getting bigger and bigger.

I read in the bible leaven is used to describe something bad. Like when Jesus told his disciples to beware the leaven of the pharisees.

Which is correct?


Thank you for your help

Brad

When the Institutional church gets big and becomes full of hot air you know it has been leavened with false teaching. :eek:

Brad1978
Oct 18th 2009, 10:12 PM
Thanks for the replies,I'm still learning. :)

Beckrl
Oct 18th 2009, 11:26 PM
To my understanding Leaven is seen as being uncleanness.

The custom is before the new harvest of the first fruits could be brought in, they would have to remove or used the last grain of the past harvest. Some Jewish family would make a game out of this to find the hidden leaven bread or grain. This is a commandment before Passover. (Exodus 12:19, Deut.16:4)

Observant Jews typically spend the weeks before Passover in a flurry of thorough housecleaning, to remove every morsel of chametz(leaven) from every part of the home.

Here in Matthew 13:33-35 Jesus tell of a woman which hid than when it was fermented it leavened the whole.

If we try to hid our sin or uncleanness it will be brought forth on that day.

Notice also on passover it is the week of unleaven bread, in Which Christ rose from the grave. Being our passover lamb and our unleaved bread which we partake in his body.Clean from any sin.(Matthew 26:26)

Sirus
Oct 19th 2009, 12:54 AM
Beckrl,
What's the true meaning of the leaven parable? What you say is true and a good explanation for the Law, but regarding the leaven parable Jesus is teaching kingdom mysteries. Not things known from the law.

Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

Beckrl
Oct 19th 2009, 02:00 AM
Beckrl,What you say is true and a good explanation for the Law, but regarding the leaven parable Jesus is teaching kingdom mysteries. Not things known from the law.

Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:


True, but all things are a foreshadow of the Messiah Jesus in which Jesus fulfills all.

Colossians 2:16-47

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

If we look at the context of what Jesus is revealing of the kindgom of heaven it is like unto the harvest.

The parable of the soil (Matt.13:3-23)
The parable of the wheat harvest (Matt.13:24-30,36-43)
The parable of the mustard seed harvest (Matt.13:31-32)
The parable of the leaven (Matt.13:33)

Therefore what is leaven, but uncleanness.
In which Jesus fulfills in the Passover, unleaven bread and first fruits. All in one week.

How therefore shall you enter the kingdom of heaven if you hid leaven in your heart?

Bible2
Oct 19th 2009, 02:12 AM
The meaning of the leaven in Matthew 13:33 can be understood by its context: "The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof. Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened" (Matthew 13:31-33).

In both parables, the basic idea is that the kingdom of God starts out as a very tiny thing that grows bigger over time. Just as it is a good thing that the literal tiny mustard seed grows into a big, beautiful tree, so it is a good thing that literal tiny spores of yeast can cause a lump of dough to grow until it can be baked into a delicious loaf of bread.

While the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees was their false doctrine (Matthew 16:12) and their hypocrisy (Luke 12:1), and Paul the apostle refers to the leaven of malice and wickedness (1 Corinthians 5:8), in Matthew 13:33 Jesus is referring to the good leaven of the kingdom of heaven: "The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven" (Matthew 13:33). Clearly, Jesus is not saying that the kingdom of heaven it like something evil.

The three measures of meal into which the kingdom of heaven is spread (Matthew 13:33) could be the three millennia from the time of Jesus' first coming until the end of his millennial kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6).

Regarding Matthew 13:32 and the birds of the air coming and lodging in the branches of the tree of the kingdom of heaven, while birds can sometimes represent something bad (Matthew 13:4,19), there is nothing evil about birds in themselves; indeed, they can represent something quite good in scripture (Isaiah 40:31), and their being in trees can represent how wonderful God's earthly creation is: "He sendeth the springs into the valleys, which run among the hills.*They give drink to every beast of the field: the wild asses quench their thirst. By them shall the fowls of the heaven have their habitation, which sing among the branches. He watereth the hills from his chambers: the earth is satisfied with the fruit of thy works. He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth; And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart. The trees of the LORD are full of sap; the cedars of Lebanon, which he hath planted; Where the birds make their nests: as for the stork, the fir trees are her house" (Psalms 104:10-17).

Note the reference also to the good "bread which strengtheneth man's heart" (Psalms 104:15), similar to how Jesus followed the parable of the tree with the parable of the making of bread (Matthew 13:32-33). These are good things, wonderful things, just as in Psalms 104:10-17. They refer to God's wonderful work in the world.

Sirus
Oct 19th 2009, 03:20 AM
True, but all things are a foreshadow of the Messiah Jesus in which Jesus fulfills all.

Colossians 2:16-47

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

If we look at the context of what Jesus is revealing of the kindgom of heaven it is like unto the harvest.

The parable of the soil (Matt.13:3-23)
The parable of the wheat harvest (Matt.13:24-30,36-43)
The parable of the mustard seed harvest (Matt.13:31-32)
The parable of the leaven (Matt.13:33)

Therefore what is leaven, but uncleanness.
In which Jesus fulfills in the Passover, unleaven bread and first fruits. All in one week.

How therefore shall you enter the kingdom of heaven if you hid leaven in your heart?
I've entered the kingdom of God already by His grace through faith in Him. I don't enter (future) by works.
Again, Jesus fulfilling the law has nothing to do with the leaven parables saying devils lodge in its branches and it grows as a result.

You can call leaven sin/corruption/unclean/false doctrine, whatever but the point here is that the kingdom puffs up because of leaven just like bread. How, in this context, does that relate to the unleavened bread of life that fulfilled the law?

There are tares (children of the wicked on) sown by the devil with that wheat!
There's no harvest in the mustard seed parable.

theBelovedDisciple
Oct 19th 2009, 02:21 PM
Hi I'm new to the forum,and I have a question.

What's the true meaning of the leaven parable?

One person told me it concerns sin. Just alittle bit of sin causes more sin.

Another person said it was like the gospel being preached in the world being planted in their hearts slowly growing getting bigger and bigger.

I read in the bible leaven is used to describe something bad. Like when Jesus told his disciples to beware the leaven of the pharisees.

Which is correct?

Thank you for your help

Brad

Many of His Disciples didn't understand what the leaven was... at that time.. but the 'leaven' of the parable is the 'corrupted teaching' of those religious leaders of His Day.. those whose corrupted teachings were thought and believed to be 'truth'.. and they exorcised these teachings on the multitudes yet they themselves never followed them completely.. Jesus exposed their hypocrisy...

Jesus really distinquished the 'source' of their teaching when He publickly rebuked them.. calling them the sons of satan, their outward appearance indeed appeared 'righteous'.. but within full of extortion and excess and uncleanness... this pointing towards spiritual corruption.. whose source is the devil himself.. as he always corrupts and distorts the Truth... as he never abode in the Truth.. and he is the father of lies...

and he mixes the Truth with his lies to make it appear as it were Truth...

This still goes on today.. and one does not have to go very far to see it in full bloom.. look at TV and listen to the Radio... so much of it out there.. that distorts the Simple Gospel of Jesus the Christ... thru subtility and entrapment thru massive theological doctrines and religous rules.. which Justify man thru his/her own works... esptablishing their own righteousnesss.. other than the Pure Righteousness which comes thru Faith and Belief in what Jesus the Christ has completed on Calvary.. while hanging on the Bloody Tree... It is Finsihed!

this is a 'heart issue'.. and the core of it lies there...

one is either led by the Holy Ghost and taught by the Helper.. who will lead you into all Truth..

or one is led by the spirit of disobedience... this representative in the wicked and the religious tares , satan has planted.... and by the looks of it.. he's been pretty busy...

Little ones.. beware the 'leaven'.... or the teaching of those who would want to draw you away from the Simplicity of Christ and His Message.. and what He has Done for you..

RabbiKnife
Oct 19th 2009, 02:26 PM
Leaven is not always "corruption" in scripture. That is making a generalization that is not true in every instance.

Leaven is simply that which has the ability to permeate everything. The parable in Matthew 13 does not contain any negative connotation.

I find it hard to believe that Jesus would say "The kingdom of heaven is like corruption that permeates everything."

That's just nuts.

goykodesh
Oct 19th 2009, 06:38 PM
I have to agree with Rabbiknife. "Leaven" is not always in the context of corrupt.

We find in Matthew 13:33, Jesus makes reference to leaven. We must remember that those who sat at His feet had the 5 books of Moses memorized, and probably most of the Prophets and other writings by age 14, so that anytime a sage brought up a key word or phrase, these passages came to mind (they didn't have chapter and verse in those days). The people that sat at Jesus' feet lived and breathed these Scriptures, and literally read (actually canted) them aloud in the Synagogues every Saturday. Also, teaching by parable was a very common rabbinic method used in Jesus' time, and anyone listening to a parable from a sage like Jesus would immediately be listening for key words or phrases. Jesus wouldn't have had to go back and read, line by line, the Scriptures He was referring to, as Pastors find they need to do these days. Everyone was a layman - at least in the written Scriptures.

In this parable, Jesus was referring to Genesis 18:6. The women may have understood better than the men that three measures would have made 50 pounds of bread. Quite a feast for three visitors indeed (one of them being the LORD). Quite a sacrifical act of worship is being referred to here, alluding to the character of Abraham (and Sarah).

Of course there is much deeper meaning to this parable. Leaven plays an important part here, but sin is not it. Before we can get there, we need to be on the same Scriptual path as Jesus as we sit as His feet.

Sirus
Oct 20th 2009, 12:00 AM
Leaven is not always "corruption" in scripture. That is making a generalization that is not true in every instance.Can you show us where it is not?


Leaven is simply that which has the ability to permeate everything.Yeah, like sin and corruption! That's why leaven is used! :idea:
1Co 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

Gal 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

Mat 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
What else permeates everything? Man rejects truth and righteousness loving darkness rather than light.


The parable in Matthew 13 does not contain any negative connotation.It doesn't? You do realize Jesus doesn't change His message throughout the chapter don't you? Tell me you don't see anything negative here ;)
Mat 13:4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:
Mat 13:5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:
Mat 13:6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.
Mat 13:7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:

Mat 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Mat 13:19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.
Mat 13:20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;
Mat 13:21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
Mat 13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

Mat 13:25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

Mat 13:28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
Mat 13:29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Mat 13:47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
Mat 13:48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
Mat 13:49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Mat 13:50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I find it hard to believe that Jesus would say "The kingdom of heaven is like corruption that permeates everything."

That's just nuts. So now why is this nuts? All the above describe the kingdom of heaven, do they not?

Question: Look at Church History. Did the Church become the greatest of trees through the doctrine of Christ/Apostles, or through corruption?

So,
Mat 13:51 Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.
Mat 13:52 Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.

Bible2
Oct 20th 2009, 01:51 AM
An example of where leaven is not always "corruption" in scripture would be Leviticus 23:16-17, where the two loaves of the feast of Pentecost had to be leavened. Also, in Leviticus 7:13, God commands another offering of leavened bread. The basic idea of leaven is in no way evil in itself; it simply is something that permeates and changes something else.

Because the false doctrine and hypocrisy of the Pharisees and the Sadducees had permeated and changed how the Jews understood and practiced their religion, Jesus could refer to the false doctrine and hypocrisy of the Pharisees and the Sadducees as being like leaven (Matthew 16:12, Luke 12:1). Similarly, because malice and wickedness in only one or a few Christians in a church congregation can permeate and change the entire church congregation for ill, Paul the apostle could refer to malice and wickedness as being like leaven (1 Corinthians 5:8). Also, because if only one or a few Christians in a church congregation start teaching the false doctrine that the Church has to get circumcised and keep the Mosaic law, this can change an entire church congregation for ill, Paul also referred to the false doctrine that the Church has to get circumcised and keep the Mosaic law as being like leaven (Galatians 5:4-14).

But these are only examples of how leaven can be employed to represent something bad that permeates and changes something else for ill. The fact that Leviticus 23:16-17 says that the two loaves of the feast of Pentecost had to be leavened suggests that leaven could also be employed as a type of something good that permeates and changes something else for good: the Holy Ghost, who came upon the Church at the feast of Pentecost (Acts 2). The two leavened loaves of Pentecost (Leviticus 23:16-17) could have typified how the Holy Ghost would eventually come upon both Jewish believers and Gentile believers (Acts 10:45). Because "the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:21) and "the kingdom of God is... righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Romans 14:17) and the Holy Ghost permeates and changes people for good (Titus 3:5), Jesus could say that "The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven" (Matthew 13:33). In that parable, the woman could represent the Church spreading the Holy Ghost to others through the laying on of hands (Acts 8:17, Acts 19:6).

Sirus
Oct 20th 2009, 02:45 AM
An example of where leaven is not always "corruption" in scripture would be Leviticus 23:16-17, where the two loaves of the feast of Pentecost had to be leavened. Also, in Leviticus 7:13, God commands another offering of leavened bread.No. Leaven is corruption here.


The basic idea of leaven is in no way evil in itself;Simply not true.


it simply is something that permeates and changes something else.Yup


Because the false doctrine and hypocrisy of the Pharisees and the Sadducees had permeated and changed how the Jews understood and practiced their religion, Jesus could refer to the false doctrine and hypocrisy of the Pharisees and the Sadducees as being like leaven (Matthew 16:12, Luke 12:1). Similarly, because malice and wickedness in only one or a few Christians in a church congregation can permeate and change the entire church congregation for ill, Paul the apostle could refer to malice and wickedness as being like leaven (1 Corinthians 5:8). Also, because if only one or a few Christians in a church congregation start teaching the false doctrine that the Church has to get circumcised and keep the Mosaic law, this can change an entire church congregation for ill, Paul also referred to the false doctrine that the Church has to get circumcised and keep the Mosaic law as being like leaven (Galatians 5:4-14).Correct, and so is taught by Christ in the leaven parables, as is seen throughout Church History. The Church follows after Israel's example of turning what God gave into something else entirely.


The fact that Leviticus 23:16-17 says that the two loaves of the feast of Pentecost had to be leavened suggests that leaven could also be employed as a type of something good that permeates and changes something else for good: the Holy Ghost, who came upon the Church at the feast of Pentecost (Acts 2). The two leavened loaves of Pentecost (Leviticus 23:16-17) could have typified how the Holy Ghost would eventually come upon both Jewish believers and Gentile believers (Acts 10:45)The Spirit takes up residence in sinners to make the Church and change us into the image of Christ. While that is a glorious thing, the leaven represents sin here.


Because "the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:21)Jesus said that to the pharisees before the cross and resurrection, before the Spirit was given.


Jesus could say that "The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven" (Matthew 13:33). In that parable, the woman could represent the Church spreading the Holy Ghost to others through the laying on of hands (Acts 8:17, Acts 19:6).Jesus said these two together in the context of what is said both before and after.
Mat 13:31 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
Mat 13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.
Mat 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
The birds/fowls (same greek word) are the wicked one/Satan, according to Jesus.
Mat 13:4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:

Mat 13:19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 20th 2009, 06:37 AM
Hi I'm new to the forum,and I have a question.

What's the true meaning of the leaven parable?

One person told me it concerns sin. Just alittle bit of sin causes more sin.

Another person said it was like the gospel being preached in the world being planted in their hearts slowly growing getting bigger and bigger.

I read in the bible leaven is used to describe something bad. Like when Jesus told his disciples to beware the leaven of the pharisees.

Which is correct?

Thank you for your help

Brad

Hi,

I assume you're referring to this parable.

Mat 13:31 He put another parable before them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field.
Mat 13:32 It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches."
Mat 13:33 He told them another parable. "The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened."

In this instance, I believe Christ uses the analogy of leaven in a good sense.

From Gill's commentary:
Mat 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them,.... To the disciples and the multitude, and which was of the same kind, to the same purpose, and relating to the same subject as the former; the spread of the Gospel, and the increase of it in the world,

The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven. The word "leaven" is every where else used in a bad sense; and either designs immorality, as malice and wickedness, or false doctrine, such as that of the Pharisees and Sadducees: but here it seems to be taken in a good sense, and the Gospel to be compared unto it; nor for its disagreeable qualities, but on account of its small quantity; it is a little leaven that leavens the whole lump, and may express, as the grain of mustard seed does, the small beginnings of the Gospel, and its meanness in the eyes of men; and on account of its piercing, penetrating, and spreading nature: so the Gospel reaches the conscience, pierces the heart, enlightens the understanding, informs the judgment, raises and sets the affections on right objects, subdues the will, and brings down all towering thoughts, to the obedience of Christ, in particular persons; and has penetrated and made its way, under divine influence, through towns, cities, kingdoms, and nations: also on account of its heating, swelling, and assimilating nature; so the Gospel, where it takes place, warms the affections, causes the heart to burn within, inspires with zeal for God, and Christ, and the Gospel; it swells and fills churches with such as shall be saved, and assimilates the several persons it operates in, makes them like one another, one bread, one body, having like precious faith, knowledge, and experience, though in a different degree,

Which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal. By the "three measures of meal", are meant the elect of God; who, because of their nature and quality, are compared to meal, or fine flour; and that because of that of which it is made, wheat, to a corn of which Christ is compared, Joh_12:24 and by whose grace the saints are what they are, justified, regenerated, and sanctified; and on account of the manner it becomes so, as by grinding the wheat, sifting it when ground, and separating it from the bran; all which may express the first convictions in the conscience of awakened sinners, the grace of God in conversion, and the separation of them from the rest of the world, in the effectual calling; as also by reason of its choiceness, purity, and goodness, the saints being chosen of God and precious, and being pure and spotless, through the grace and righteousness of Christ, and being highly valued, and had in great esteem by him; and because of their quantity, are compared to three measures of meal. The measure here designed, is the Hebrew seah, which held a gallon and an half, and three of these made an ephah; and which is often rendered by the (a) Targumists, תלת סאין, "three seahs", or "measures", the very phrase here used; and the reason why three are particularly mentioned is, because such a quantity used to be fermented and kneaded by women at one time; see Gen_18:6 and for the further illustration of this, take the following passage out of the Talmud (b),

"The wise men say, that three women may be employed in one lump of dough; one may knead it, another may make it into loaves, and another may bake it--and it is a tradition,

בחיטין שלשת קבין "that in wheat they use three kabs", or "measures", and in barley four "kabs".

These measures, as here used parabolically, may design the small number of God's elect; and, as some have thought, may have respect to the three then known parts of the world, where they were, or should be: by the woman that took and hid the leaven in these measures, is meant, either the church, sometimes compared to a woman in Scripture, Rev_12:1 or the ministers of the Gospel, wisdom's maidens; or rather, Jesus Christ, the wisdom of God; see Pro_9:1 and the reason why a woman is mentioned is, because it was, with the Jews, the work of women to ferment the flour, knead the dough, and make the bread: and this action of taking and covering the leaven in the meal, may denote the power of Christ, in opening the heart, and putting in the Gospel, which unless he takes in hand, and uses, is ineffectual; as also the passiveness of men, under the first workings of the Spirit of Christ upon their souls, by the Gospel; and likewise, the secret and invisible power of divine grace, operating by the ministry of the word, upon the heart,

Until the whole was leavened: to be "leavened" by the Gospel, is to be evangelized by it, to be brought into the life and liberty of it, to a Gospel way of living by faith on Christ; to derive all peace, joy, and comfort from him, and not from any works of righteousness; and to have a man's obedience influenced by the love of God, so as to do it cheerfully, and without dependence on it. Now the Gospel, where it has entrance and takes place, powerfully and effectually, continues to operate more or less, as the leaven in the meal, until the whole man, soul and body, all the faculties of the soul, and members of the body, are influenced by it; and will continue with power and efficacy in the world, and church, until all the elect of God are wrought upon by it, and are brought in. There is a late ingenious interpretation (c) of this parable, which, since the word "leaven" is elsewhere always used in a bad sense, deserves consideration; according to which, this parable expresses not the spread of truth, but of error; by "the woman" is thought to be meant, the Apocalyptic woman, the woman spoken of in the Revelations, the whore of Rome, the mother of harlots; and the "leaven" which she took, the leaven of false doctrine and discipline; by her "hiding" it, the private, secret, artful methods, false doctrines, and bad discipline were introduced, and the gradual progress thereof; and by the "three measures of meal", the bishops and doctors of the church, among whom this leaven was spread, and who were fermented with it; particularly those three bishops of Rome at first, Sosymus, John the faster, and Boniface the third; which by degrees spread itself, until the whole Christian world was affected with it; and for a long time lay hid and undiscovered, till the Lord raised up Wyclif, John Huss, Jerom of Prague, Luther, and other reformers. The reader may choose which interpretation he likes best,

matthew94
Oct 20th 2009, 07:43 PM
I used to think (because I was taught) that the Matthew 13 leaven (And mustard seed) parables were to be interpreted negatively. I've come to realize, though, that this just doesn't work with the context of Jesus' statement. In this case, leaven is being used generally for something which permeates.

The message of the parable is that the kingdom of God is going to start out small and hidden. It won't come the way it was expected (through military might). God's kingdom is a different kind of kingdom. It works from the inside out, quietly, and patiently.

goykodesh
Oct 20th 2009, 08:22 PM
I used to think (because I was taught) that the Matthew 13 leaven (And mustard seed) parables were to be interpreted negatively. I've come to realize, though, that this just doesn't work with the context of Jesus' statement. In this case, leaven is being used generally for something which permeates.

Bullseye!


The message of the parable is that the kingdom of God is going to start out small and hidden. It won't come the way it was expected (through military might). God's kingdom is a different kind of kingdom. It works from the inside out, quietly, and patiently.

Jesus invoked a key phrase that would have directed His audience to the context of Genesis 18:6.

Beckrl
Oct 20th 2009, 11:05 PM
I also see were it could be interperted, that is leaven could be interperted as the Holy Spirit.

There by the Spirit givens us power to rise above.

Sirus
Oct 21st 2009, 12:43 AM
When you spiritualize, anything can mean anything. That's why Scripture interprets scripture. So that we do not err.

Would the 'fowls of the air lodge in the branches of it' if it remained small? Would they (Satan/devils) be comfortable in an uncorrupted Church?
What does 'woman' represent in Scripture?

goykodesh
Oct 21st 2009, 04:07 PM
When you spiritualize, anything can mean anything. That's why Scripture interprets scripture. So that we do not err.

Would the 'fowls of the air lodge in the branches of it' if it remained small? Would they (Satan/devils) be comfortable in an uncorrupted Church?
What does 'woman' represent in Scripture?

This (bolded) is so important, yet so under-used.

Beckrl
Oct 22nd 2009, 12:05 AM
How shall we interpert the use of a parable? If no interpertation is given shouldn't we spiritualize it?

The kingdom of heaven is like unto: Isn't that using a earthly concept to show us a heavenly (spiritual) concept?

Sirus
Oct 22nd 2009, 12:19 AM
We are given the interpretation. That's the point. What is leaven and woman in scripture? What did Jesus say fowls were? What is the entire context saying? Would Jesus' words come true? What does Church History reveal?

Since Jesus is talking about the visible 'Church' with wheat/tares, good/bad, righteous/iniquity, why are you looking for a spiritual concept? Spiritually we have
1) seed (word of God) sown in hearts and either stolen, died, or kept
2) 'kingdom' mysteries being revealed to those that seek truthOther than that, why does what is revealed have to be spiritual? Why can't it be revealing what the visible church would become?

Sirus
Oct 22nd 2009, 12:23 AM
This (bolded) is so important, yet so under-used.Thanks...
That why I am asking people to focus on the other half of the mustard seed parable. We want to make up what we think the first half is, discarding the second half that Jesus Himself already defined. Why do we do this? Then consider the entire context and ask, is it saying something different? Has Jesus gone off track for a few sentences and returned to the context? That not only makes 0 sense but it is not how we should interpret scripture. Is it? :idea:

matthew94
Oct 22nd 2009, 04:24 PM
In this debate, it is not a matter of one side 'spiritualizing' and the other side allowing 'Scripture to interpret Scripture.' It's really a matter of WHAT SCRIPTURES are seen as the appropriate cross references.

I think the mustard seed parable connects with Ezekiel 17:23, in which God uses a large tree with birds nesting in it to describe His own future kingdom

Leaven IS sometimes positively commanded in the Scriptures (ie. Lev. 7:13-14, 23:17)

In other words, interpreting the parables positively is NOT spiritualizing the interpretation. It is recognizing that Jesus is describing HIS kingdom and connecting it to the appropriate OT texts.

goykodesh
Oct 22nd 2009, 08:19 PM
Thanks...
That why I am asking people to focus on the other half of the mustard seed parable. We want to make up what we think the first half is, discarding the second half that Jesus Himself already defined. Why do we do this? Then consider the entire context and ask, is it saying something different? Has Jesus gone off track for a few sentences and returned to the context? That not only makes 0 sense but it is not how we should interpret scripture. Is it? :idea:

I don't see any way to spiritualize this parable (the reference to Ezekiel 17 works) or the leaven and the woman parable (a reference to Genesis 18). Jesus was just teaching in terms his listeners could relate to 1) (agriculture) and 2) stringing pearls (Scripture teaching Scripture). That's how all great Torah teachers and sages taught in that day. There wasn't much 'sprititualization;' going on in those days. Though unlike the Torah teachers and sages, Jesus may used that teaching method, but, we can count on the truth contained in all of them. If Jesus can teach that way (Scripture teaching Scripture), shouldn't we? His disciples did.

Leaven is not 'good' or 'bad' just like 'shadows' aren't 'good' nor 'bad.' They point to something or someone. That is where we should direct our attention.

Sirus
Oct 23rd 2009, 02:40 AM
In this debate, it is not a matter of one side 'spiritualizing' and the other side allowing 'Scripture to interpret Scripture.' It's really a matter of WHAT SCRIPTURES are seen as the appropriate cross references.Correct! Which is why I spoke against spiritualizing when the Spirit was likened to leaven, for which there is no possibility.


I think the mustard seed parable connects with Ezekiel 17:23, in which God uses a large tree with birds nesting in it to describe His own future kingdomYes! ..and what are the birds? What did Jesus say? What does Ezekiel 17:24 say?


Leaven IS sometimes positively commanded in the Scriptures (ie. Lev. 7:13-14, 23:17)positively commanded? What's that mean? How is it relevant? The leaven is not positive in these examples, whether you want to consider it positively commanded or not.


In other words, interpreting the parables positively is NOT spiritualizing the interpretation. It is recognizing that Jesus is describing HIS kingdom and connecting it to the appropriate OT texts.OK, interpreting the parable positively is not understanding the interpretation/explanation of JEsus Himself or the OT texts.

Sirus
Oct 23rd 2009, 02:48 AM
I don't see any way to spiritualize this parable (the reference to Ezekiel 17 works) or the leaven and the woman parable (a reference to Genesis 18).

Leaven is not 'good' or 'bad' just like 'shadows' aren't 'good' nor 'bad.' They point to something or someone. That is where we should direct our attention.Yes. Eze 17 works just as I have stated the mustard seed and leaven parables work.

I have no idea why you bring up Genesis 18. It supports my pov not yours. There was no leaven there as there is in Mat 13.

Leaven is always bad is scripture. No one has shown otherwise.

Diggindeeper
Oct 23rd 2009, 03:05 AM
Hi I'm new to the forum,and I have a question.

What's the true meaning of the leaven parable?

One person told me it concerns sin. Just alittle bit of sin causes more sin.

Another person said it was like the gospel being preached in the world being planted in their hearts slowly growing getting bigger and bigger.

I read in the bible leaven is used to describe something bad. Like when Jesus told his disciples to beware the leaven of the pharisees.

Which is correct?

Thank you for your help

Brad

Paul said:
Galations 5:9

9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

I have made homemade yeast rolls and let me tell you, it does not take much of that yeast to really puff up that dough! Man, just one tablespoon of yeast will make that thing puff up and puff up, bigger by the minute! But yeast is good, when it is in homemade bread!

But let me tell you one thing, once that yeast is in that dough...there is NO WAY to get it out! It is there to stay!

This is how bad leaven is...it grows bigger and bigger, but could be fatal.

Its the same with sin. One little bit can grow and grow and grow! And how can we get rid of it? We can't. It is there. Period. Only the saving blood of Jesus can wipe us clean from sin that is there....

It does not take much poison in a few bites of food or drink to kill a person, either! Just a little bit of rat poison can mean our death.

Beware of leaven, that it is good and not the bad kind of the scribes and Pharisees. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump!

goykodesh
Oct 23rd 2009, 04:10 PM
Yes. Eze 17 works just as I have stated the mustard seed and leaven parables work.

I have no idea why you bring up Genesis 18. It supports my pov not yours. There was no leaven there as there is in Mat 13.

Leaven is always bad is scripture. No one has shown otherwise.

I'm confused. You're saying any reference to leaven in Scritpure is "bad?" How is Sarah making 50 pounds of leavened bread for the LORD and His two compaions 'bad?'

Do you think Jews clean all the leaven out of their homes on Pesach/FF because it is 'bad?'

RabbiKnife
Oct 23rd 2009, 04:12 PM
I'm confused. You're saying any reference to leaven in Scritpure is "bad?" How is Sarah making 50 pounds of leavened bread for the LORD and His two compaions 'bad?'

Leaven in the parable of the leaven is good.

Unless you have a predetermined idea that "leaven" is ALWAYS bad.

Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.

goykodesh
Oct 23rd 2009, 04:19 PM
Paul said:
Galations 5:9

9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

I have made homemade yeast rolls and let me tell you, it does not take much of that yeast to really puff up that dough! Man, just one tablespoon of yeast will make that thing puff up and puff up, bigger by the minute! But yeast is good, when it is in homemade bread!

But let me tell you one thing, once that yeast is in that dough...there is NO WAY to get it out! It is there to stay!

This is how bad leaven is...it grows bigger and bigger, but could be fatal.

Its the same with sin. One little bit can grow and grow and grow! And how can we get rid of it? We can't. It is there. Period. Only the saving blood of Jesus can wipe us clean from sin that is there....

It does not take much poison in a few bites of food or drink to kill a person, either! Just a little bit of rat poison can mean our death.

Beware of leaven, that it is good and not the bad kind of the scribes and Pharisees. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump!

That's one meaning of leaven. It's all about context. We have to try to think like the people thought to whom this was spoken to if we want to understand context.

Beckrl
Oct 23rd 2009, 08:24 PM
That's one meaning of leaven. It's all about context. We have to try to think like the people thought to whom this was spoken to if we want to understand context.


If we look with a jewish point of view we would come to a question.

Why would the woman hid the leaven?

In Jewish tradition the removal of Chametz. Cleaning out the old leaven. The custom of ten pieces hidden in a room to be searched. The children would hunt until all ten is founded.

1 corinthians 5
7Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
8Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth

Sirus
Oct 24th 2009, 03:24 AM
I'm confused. You're saying any reference to leaven in Scritpure is "bad?"absolutely!!! No one has produced a good example yet.


How is Sarah making 50 pounds of leavened bread for the LORD and His two compaions 'bad?'Where is leaven in Genesis 18? If you want to assume it was in the cakes, fine. I ate leavened bread for dinner tonight. Wasn't bad! In fact it was some of the best home made bread my wife has ever made!


Do you think Jews clean all the leaven out of their homes on Pesach/FF because it is 'bad?'Is this a serious question? If they ate leavened bread in the seven days they were cut off from Israel (Exo 12:15). I'd say that's bad, wouldn't you?

Is it a good thing the Law was added? Or was it added because of transgression? Are we really having this conversation? Just because leaven is used in a sacrifice does that make it good? It is being used in the Law that exists because of sin. If not for sin the sacrifice would not be offered.

Sirus
Oct 24th 2009, 03:29 AM
Leaven in the parable of the leaven is good.

Unless you have a predetermined idea that "leaven" is ALWAYS bad.

Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.Sure, if you have a predetermined idea that "leaven" is not ALWAYS bad.

What do fowls represent? Or do you just exclude fowls from the text?

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 24th 2009, 03:35 AM
Is this a serious question? If they ate leavened bread in the seven days they were cut off from Israel (Exo 12:15). I'd say that's bad, wouldn't you?


Why did God command that any Israelite who ate leavened bread during the observance for Passover to be cut off? We must understand the purpose and not just the surface of things.

The reason why they were to clean out their houses of all leaven and eat only unleavened bread is because they were to remember that they only exist today because God delivered them with his mighty hand out of Egypt, and did great signs and wonders to set them free.

By eating bread with leaven, they will be disrespecting this observance, and thus do not give glory and worship to the God who delivered them. In other words, they are not to take this observance lightly, God commanded the observance of this meal for the reason of reminding the entire nation that He is God.

It wasn't because leaven was "bad." They were free to eat leavened bread every other day throughout the year.

Also, leaven in this parable is not bad. Jesus was using leaven to teach the apostles that the Kingdom of God will grow from insignificant beginnings into a magnificent kingdom of people as we see today. The same meaning is in the mustard seed parable above it. This is a promise to the apostles, who later had to die for the faith. Should they ever doubt and fear that their mission is going to die, because of persecutions, they will think back and remember this promise the Lord gave them.

This parable might not mean very much to us today, but it meant a lot to the early believers who were being pursued and killed daily for the faith. The Lord picked daily things that they understood to illustrate how something small can grow to immense proportions, in their world, the mustard seed and leaven were the two best things to illustrate this.

Sirus
Oct 24th 2009, 03:41 AM
It wasn't because leaven was "bad." They were free to eat leavened bread every other day throughout the year.Hello! I just said I just ate leavened bread. Leaven is not bad on my table. It is in scripture. Got it?
3rd page, 1 page is still just being repeated.......
Where does leaven represent 'good' in scripture?
Anyone?

Sirus
Oct 24th 2009, 03:47 AM
Also, leaven in this parable is not bad. Jesus was using leaven to teach the apostles that the Kingdom of God will grow from insignificant beginnings into a magnificent kingdom of people as we see today. The same meaning is in the mustard seed parable above it. This is a promise to the apostles, who later had to die for the faith. Should they ever doubt and fear that their mission is going to die, because of persecutions, they will think back and remember this promise the Lord gave them.

This parable might not mean very much to us today, but it meant a lot to the early believers who were being pursued and killed daily for the faith. The Lord picked daily things that they understood to illustrate how something small can grow to immense proportions, in their world, the mustard seed and leaven were the two best things to illustrate this.Gotta love them fowls lodged in the branches, tares sown by the wicked one, and bad fish, eh? Paul says purge out the leaven (in what context?????????).....tares, bad fish, fowls (devils). Go ahead and ignore the entire chapter and its context.....

matthew94
Oct 24th 2009, 04:47 PM
Yes! ..and what are the birds? What did Jesus say? What does Ezekiel 17:24 say?

The birds represent the fact that gentiles will be part of God's kingdom as well. Jesus parable, then, re-iterates this fact. Ezekiel 17:24 states basically the same (positive) point of the parable, that God is in the business of taking something with humble beginnings and make it great. If we agree that this is an appropriate cross reference then we are agreeing that Jesus is making a very POSITIVE point.


positively commanded? What's that mean? How is it relevant? The leaven is not positive in these examples, whether you want to consider it positively commanded or not.

By 'positively commanded' I simply mean that God commanded the Israelites, in those passages, to used LEAVENED bread. In other words, if you are going to take the many passages where God commanded them to abstain from using UNLEAVENED bread as an indication that leaven is a symbol for something bad, then you also have to allow for the places where they are specifically told to use leaven to indicate that leaven can also be a positive symbol.


OK, interpreting the parable positively is not understanding the interpretation/explanation of JEsus Himself or the OT texts.

The ability to state a conclusion is not the same as the demonstration that one's conclusion is correct.

matthew94
Oct 24th 2009, 04:50 PM
Gotta love them fowls lodged in the branches, tares sown by the wicked one, and bad fish, eh? Paul says purge out the leaven (in what context?????????).....tares, bad fish, fowls (devils). Go ahead and ignore the entire chapter and its context.....

Matthew has grouped several parables together. This 'negative context' you are referring to doesn't even exist in the parallel! If the context in Mark 4 doesn't include the tares parable, or the bad fish parable, but is instead preceeded by a parable about a growing seed (obviously positive). The context, then, in Mark 4 is thoroughly positive.

Sirus
Oct 24th 2009, 07:00 PM
The birds represent the fact that gentiles will be part of God's kingdom as well. Jesus parable, then, re-iterates this fact. Ezekiel 17:24 states basically the same (positive) point of the parable, that God is in the business of taking something with humble beginnings and make it great. If we agree that this is an appropriate cross reference then we are agreeing that Jesus is making a very POSITIVE point.We agree in the cross reference only. Jesus said the fowls
G4071, πετεινόν, peteinon
in parables are Satan. I have shown this very plainly, but I will do it again.

Mat 13:4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:
..........
Mat 13:19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.
...........
Mat 13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

Mar 4:4 And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the fowls of the air came and devoured it up.
..........
Mar 4:13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?
Mar 4:14 The sower soweth the word.
Mar 4:15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.
.........
Mar 4:32 But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.

Luk 8:5 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it.
.............
Luk 8:12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.


if you are going to take the many passages where God commanded them to abstain from using UNLEAVENED bread as an indication that leaven is a symbol for something bad, then you also have to allow for the places where they are specifically told to use leaven to indicate that leaven can also be a positive symbol.Why? It is what it represents, not its existence.

Sirus
Oct 24th 2009, 07:13 PM
Matthew has grouped several parables together. This 'negative context' you are referring to doesn't even exist in the parallel! If the context in Mark 4 doesn't include the tares parable, or the bad fish parable, but is instead preceeded by a parable about a growing seed (obviously positive). The context, then, in Mark 4 is thoroughly positive.Not at all because fowls are still defined as Satan in Mark and Luke.

I do not say there is no difference. However the differences in the visible kingdom (of heaven -physical universe) and the invisible kingdom (of God) are not the subject of this thread.

You are correct that there are no tares or bad fish in the invisible spiritual kingdom of God. The kingdom is both spiritual (invisible -does not come by observation) and physical (visible). You can see this difference here.
Mat 13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

Mar 4:32 But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.
Satan is not part of the kingdom of God (Mark and Luke), but he is the god of this world -the field that the kingdom of heaven is like (Mat 13:38), and he offered the kingdoms of this world to Jesus because they were his to give to who ever he willed.

matthew94
Oct 24th 2009, 07:17 PM
We agree in the cross reference only. Jesus said the fowls
G4071, πετεινόν, peteinon
in parables are Satan. I have shown this very plainly, but I will do it again.

When you are debating a point, it makes zero sense to state a fact that both sides completely agree with AS IF that aids your cause. We ALL AGREE that the birds represent Satan in the parable of the sower. Jesus said so.

The mistake you are making is in insisting that because birds represented something negative in one parable, they must ALWAYS represent something bad. I have clearly demonstrated that this is not the case. In the Ezekiel passage, birds represent gentiles being included in the kingdom. Surely that is a positive thing!

Your error is that you are making too much of a connection b/w the various parables of Matthew 13. Matthew combined these parables b/c they are all about the kingdom, not, necessarily, because Jesus spoke them all at the same time. Perhaps this is why you neglected to react to the point that Mark includes the same parable with more positive contextual surroundings


Why? It is what it represents, not its existence.

I'm not even sure I understand your sentence. In any case, my point is simply that Israel was sometimes told not to use leaven (like, when they had to flee quickly) and sometimes told to use leaven (like the passages I mentioned). There is nothing inherently bad about leaven. It can be used to make a negative or a positive point. The Bible makes the negative point most usually, but that shouldn't cause us to make any sort of absolute rule.

matthew94
Oct 24th 2009, 07:20 PM
Not at all because fowls are still defined as Satan in Mark and Luke.

I do not say there is no difference. However the differences in the visible kingdom (of heaven -physical universe) and the invisible kingdom (of God) are not the subject of this thread.

You are correct that there are no tares or bad fish in the invisible spiritual kingdom of God. The kingdom is both spiritual (invisible -does not come by observation) and physical (visible). You can see this difference here.
Mat 13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

Mar 4:32 But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.
Satan is not part of the kingdom of God (Mark), but he is the god of this world and the field that the kingdom of heaven is like is the world (Mat 13:38) and he offered the kingdoms of this world to Jesus because they were his to give to who ever he willed.

You are still taking the interpretation of the SOWER parable and mixing it in with the mustard seed parable. They are two different parables. We agree that the birds are bad in the sower parable.

Sirus
Oct 25th 2009, 03:45 AM
When you are debating a point, it makes zero sense to state a fact that both sides completely agree with AS IF that aids your cause. We ALL AGREE that the birds represent Satan in the parable of the sower. Jesus said so.

The mistake you are making is in insisting that because birds represented something negative in one parable, they must ALWAYS represent something bad.You changed the meaning of fowl in Eze 17:23 to be something other than what Jesus said it is, so you do not agree. Jesus said
Mat 13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

Mar 4:32 But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.
Eze 17:23 says
Eze 17:23 In the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it: and it shall bring forth boughs, and bear fruit, and be a goodly cedar: and under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing; in the shadow of the branches thereof shall they dwell.
It is not a mistake to say fowls must ALWAYS represent something bad in parables. Jesus said they do
Mar 4:13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?
Mar 4:14 The sower soweth the word.
Mar 4:15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.
Since Jesus is stating what Ezekiel did, why would I apply another meaning to it having nothing to base another meaning on? ? ? ? Scripture interprets scripture. Where are fowls Gentiles? Hmmmm? Where? Trees/branches are gentiles in Romans for one example. Where are fowls Gentiles? No where. They are either beasts God takes care (general) of or devils (in parables).

I have clearly demonstrated that this is not the case. In the Ezekiel passage, birds represent gentiles being included in the kingdom. Surely that is a positive thing!You have only clearly stated your opinion, and you are wrong.
Eze 17:22 Thus saith the Lord GOD; I will also take of the highest branch of the high cedar, and will set it; I will crop off from the top of his young twigs a tender one, and will plant it upon an high mountain and eminent:
Eze 17:23 In the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it: and it shall bring forth boughs, and bear fruit, and be a goodly cedar: and under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing; in the shadow of the branches thereof shall they dwell.
Eze 17:24 And all the trees of the field shall know that I the LORD have brought down the high tree, have exalted the low tree, have dried up the green tree, and have made the dry tree to flourish: I the LORD have spoken and have done it.
Fowls are devils here. Jesus did not say the same thing and change the meaning. That's silly.

The trees of the field -the world (Mat 13:38), are the nations.

God exalted the low tree -Nebuchadnezzar --represented as Babylon
The high tree is Christ from heaven brought down to the world (field) and planted.
Babylon flourishes as the green tree that God will dry up.
The dry tree is Israel that will flourish when the green tree is dried up.
Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Your error is that you are making too much of a connection b/w the various parables of Matthew 13. Matthew combined these parables b/c they are all about the kingdom, not, necessarily, because Jesus spoke them all at the same time. Perhaps this is why you neglected to react to the point that Mark includes the same parable with more positive contextual surroundingsI did react and showed you you are wrong there too. Fowls exist in Matthew, Mark and Luke. There are no tares or bad fish in the invisible spiritual kingdom of God and that certainly is a positive. Kind of a no brainer though, don't ya think?


I'm not even sure I understand your sentence.You can't explain why?


There is nothing inherently bad about leaven.Again? You say this again?
*sigh
http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=2248654&postcount=37
Who said it is inherently bad? Not I.



It can be used to make a negative or a positive point.Where's a positive?


The Bible makes the negative point most usually, but that shouldn't cause us to make any sort of absolute rule.If you cannot point to a positive then negative is the absolute rule, especially when said in a parable with Satan, hid, and in the context of tares and bad fish. Ya think? :idea:


You are still taking the interpretation of the SOWER parable and mixing it in with the mustard seed parable. They are two different parables. We agree that the birds are bad in the sower parable.Same context through out. Definitely before and after, so as I asked earlier, did Jesus change subjects for a few sentences then switch back to the previous subject? Of course not. I know most Christians interpret scripture this way, and I know a lot here do as well, but are you really going to take that stance?

Beckrl
Oct 25th 2009, 06:12 PM
What was the reason the woman was hidding the leaven?
Why did she hid it in the meal?


That to me that's a bad place to hid leaven ;):lol:

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 26th 2009, 03:04 AM
Sirius,
I looked up all the Bible commentaries that I have access to regarding this parable.

The following Bible commentators disagree with your views that leaven is meant to be something bad in this parable.

They all agree that leaven was meant to demonstrate the way in which the kingdom of God will work, in the hearts of men, secretly, silently and unseen, with small beginnings till it pervades every nook and cranny of our being and even of society.

Albert Barnes
Adam Clarke
John Gill
Matthew Henry
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown
B.W. Johnson
Robertson's Word Pictures

Only Scofield holds to the view that leaven is evil, yet he does not give an explaination then of how it relates to the parable before it. This is what Scofield wrote:

Interpreting the parable by these familiar symbols, it constitutes a warning that the true doctrine, given for nourishment of the children of the kingdom; (Mat_4:4); (1Ti_4:6); (1Pe_2:2) would be mingled with corrupt and corrupting false doctrine, and that officially, by the apostate church itself; (1Ti_4:1-3); (2Ti_2:17-18); (2Ti_4:3-4); (2Pe_2:1-3).

I found an interesting comment in RWP's commentary:

Is like unto leaven (homoia estin zumēi). In its pervasive power. Curiously enough some people deny that Jesus here likens the expanding power of the Kingdom of heaven to leaven, because, they say, leaven is the symbol of corruption.

But the language of Jesus is not to be explained away by such exegetical jugglery. The devil is called like a lion by Peter (1Pe_5:8) and Jesus in Revelation is called the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev_5:5). The leaven permeates all the “wheaten meal” (aleurou) till the whole is leavened. There is nothing in the “three measures,” merely a common amount to bake. Dr. T.R. Glover in his Jesus of History suggests that Jesus used to notice his mother using that amount of wheat flour in baking bread. To find the Trinity here is, of course, quite beside the mark. The word for leaven, zumē, is from zeō, to boil, to seethe, and so pervasive fermentation.

By its natural reading, the meaning is quite clear:

Mat 13:31 He put another parable before them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field.

- why was the kingdom of heaven like a grain of mustard seed? Jesus gives the explanation himself in the next verse

Mat 13:32 It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches."

- Jesus explains why the kingdom is likened to a grain of mustard seed. The emphasis is on its initial size, its beginnings, which is tiny, when when it is grown it becomes much larger than any other plant.
- The illustration of the birds is just to illustrate how large and strong this tree will grow, so that even birds will come and make nests in it. This is used to illustrate the eventual size of God's kingdom, not that the birds are Satan.
- Birds will not make nests in small and weakly trees, when the wind blows the nest falls to the ground and is destroyed.
- I don't see how Scofield's commentary fits in with the plain reading of this parable.


Mat 13:33 He told them another parable. "The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened."

- again the emphasis is on growth and spread, not on corruption.
- leaven above cannot mean evil for a simple reason. It says "till it was ALL leavened." Are we then to conclude that the devil will then corrupt all of Christ's church? Yet this is not what Scripture says, which clearly teaches that the gates of hell will never prevail against the true church of Christ.

Thus to me, the leaven = evil explaination holds no water when read in the context of the parables above.

Sirus
Oct 26th 2009, 03:39 AM
Sirius,
I looked up all the Bible commentaries that I have access to regarding this parable.

The following Bible commentators disagree with your views that leaven is meant to be something bad in this parable.

They all agree that leaven was meant to demonstrate the way in which the kingdom of God will work, in the hearts of men, secretly, silently and unseen, with small beginnings till it pervades every nook and cranny of our being and even of society.

Albert Barnes
Adam Clarke
John Gill
Matthew Henry
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown
B.W. Johnson
Robertson's Word Pictures

Only Scofield holds to the view that leaven is evil, yet he does not give an explaination then of how it relates to the parable before it.Yes I know, and it's no surprise.

Sirus
Oct 26th 2009, 03:40 AM
What was the reason the woman was hidding the leaven?
Why did she hid it in the meal?


That to me that's a bad place to hid leaven ;):lol:It's the perfect place actually. Why do you think she did it? Who is she?

Sirus
Oct 26th 2009, 04:17 AM
yet he does not give an explaination then of how it relates to the parable before it.Actually he does. The previous mustard seed parable goes with the leaven parable because of growth. There's no need to specifically address it unless one wants to focus on Jesus' definition of fowls as I do.
Scofield
(3) The use of the word in (Mat_13:33) is congruous with its universal meaning.
BTW; Darby also agrees with some of my views. He also answers Beckrl concerning the woman seen throughout scripture as a religious system, as does Scofield.
Darby
That which had been sown as a grain of mustard-seed becomes a great tree; a symbol that represents a great power in the earth. The Assyrian, Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, are set before us in the word as great trees. Such would be the form of the kingdom, which began in littleness through the word sown by the Lord, and afterwards by His disciples. That which this seed produced would gradually assume the form of a great power, making itself prominent on the earth, so that others would shelter themselves under it, as birds under the branches of a tree. This has, indeed, been the case.

We next find that it would not only be a great tree in the earth, but that the kingdom would be characterised as a system of doctrine, which would diffuse itself — a profession, which would enclose all it reached within its sphere of influence. The whole of the three measures would be leavened. I need not dwell here on the fact that the word leaven is always used in a bad sense by the sacred writers; but the Holy Ghost gives us to understand that it is not the regenerative power of the word in the heart of an individual, bringing him back to God; neither is it simply a power acting by outward strength, such as Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, and the other great trees of scripture. But it is a system of doctrine that should characterise the mass, pervading it throughout. It is not faith properly so called, nor is it life. It is a religion; it is Christendom. A profession of doctrine, in hearts which will bear neither the truth nor God, connects itself always with corruption in the doctrine itself.

Scofield
A woman, in the bad ethical sense, always symbolizes something out of place, religiously

In Thyatira, it was a woman teaching.

Sirus
Oct 26th 2009, 04:23 AM
- leaven above cannot mean evil for a simple reason. It says "till it was ALL leavened."You don't believe in corporate apostasy?

Sirus
Oct 26th 2009, 04:26 AM
They all agree that leaven was meant to demonstrate the way in which the kingdom of God will work, in the hearts of men, secretly, silently and unseen, with small beginnings till it pervades every nook and cranny of our being and even of society.Scofield and I have addressed this as well.

Scofield
That interpretation of the parable of the Leaven (Mat_13:33) which makes (with variation as to details) the leaven to be the Gospel, introduced into the world ("three measures of meal") by the church, and working subtly until the world is converted ("till the whole was leavened") is open to fatal objection:

(1) it does violence to the unvarying symbolical meaning of leaven, and especially to the meaning fixed by our Lord Himself. (Mat_16:6-12); (Mar_8:15).

(2) The implication of a converted world in this age ("till the whole was leavened"), is explicitly contradicted by our Lord's interpretation of the parables of the Wheat and Tares, and of the Net. Our Lord presents a picture of a partly converted kingdom in an unconverted world; of good fish and bad in the very kingdom-net itself.
Now, you are telling me that
"it pervades every nook and cranny of our being and even of society."
and I want scripture!

Sirus
Oct 26th 2009, 04:40 AM
Mat 13:32 It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches."

- Jesus explains why the kingdom is likened to a grain of mustard seed. The emphasis is on its initial size, its beginnings, which is tiny, when when it is grown it becomes much larger than any other plant.
- The illustration of the birds is just to illustrate how large and strong this tree will grow, so that even birds will come and make nests in it. This is used to illustrate the eventual size of God's kingdom, not that the birds are Satan.
- Birds will not make nests in small and weakly trees, when the wind blows the nest falls to the ground and is destroyed.
- I don't see how Scofield's commentary fits in with the plain reading of this parable.The birds (fowls) are Satan/devil in ALL parables according to Jesus. Ever hear of doctrines of devils? Doctrine of the religious (pharisees) and worldly political power (Herod) who's father was the devil?

Satan would not be comfortable in God's kingdom. So he subverted it with false teaching and that false 'church' became a great tree they could live in.

When did the church grow to be 'great'?
Was it through the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles?

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 26th 2009, 08:22 AM
You don't believe in corporate apostasy?

So you're claiming the entire church of Christ is corrupted?

matthew94
Oct 26th 2009, 01:55 PM
You changed the meaning of fowl in Eze 17:23 to be something other than what Jesus said it is, so you do not agree.

There's not much more to say here. You are just flat out mis-interpreting the Ezekiel passage. Worse yet, you are then mis-interpreting Jesus' parable and THEN going back and using that mis-interpretation to mis-interpret Ezekiel.


It is not a mistake to say fowls must ALWAYS represent something bad in parables. Jesus said they doNo, he did not. He said they represented Satan in the parable of the sower. It was not a blanket statement. You only say such a thing b/c you're entire argument depends on that point.


Mar 4:13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables? Ah! So here is your basis for saying a bird(s) must ALWAYS be bad in the parables?!?! You're twisting Jesus' words to mean that all parables have to follow the symbolism of that one parable. Why not just take the statement for what it says?


Fowls are devils here. Jesus did not say the same thing and change the meaning. That's silly.Frankly, I don't think it's worth continuing this conversation any further if you insist on interpreting the birds in Ezekiel negatively. Nothing in the context suggests that.

I just hope you realize you're reading your negative interpretation into Ezekiel and then using that negative interpretation of Ezekiel to support your negative interpretation of Jesus' parable and then using that negative interpretation of Jesus' parable to support your negative interpretation of Ezekiel and so on and so on! It's incredibly circular.

All that being said, I can see why you interpret the parable negatively (I used to myself). I can't see why you interpret Ezekiel negatively (that's just flat out bad interpretation in my opinion). But let me ask you a more practical question:

Even though I totally disagree with your interpretation, I recognize a truism in the point such an interpretation makes. Yes, there is some corruption, a lot of it, in the visible church. And even though you totally disagree with the scholarly interpretation, I'm sure you recognize a truism in the point such an interpretation makes. Yes, the true Kingdom of God did start small and humbly and grew with time.

So both points have truth in them, even though only one of them is the proper interpretation. No?

Beckrl
Oct 26th 2009, 11:06 PM
It's the perfect place actually. Why do you think she did it? Who is she?

So if the woman is the church and she hid leaven in the meal. What is the leaven? Without spiritualizing.

goykodesh
Oct 26th 2009, 11:23 PM
So if the woman is the church and she hid leaven in the meal. What is the leaven? Without spiritualizing.

If we're talking about bread, leaven is basically bread that has begun the process of fermenting.

Come to think of it, unlike the famous (or infamous depending on your perspective) hollywood depictions of the last supper (Pesach meal), Jesus would have been breaking matza, not leavened bread, specifically a corner of it (for reasons not germane to this thread) to be shared. Isn't it obvious what He is saying? This is my body..... - "[unleavened by corruption]" In this context, leaven is corruption.

Sirus
Oct 27th 2009, 01:11 AM
There's not much more to say here. You are just flat out mis-interpreting the Ezekiel passage. Worse yet, you are then mis-interpreting Jesus' parable and THEN going back and using that mis-interpretation to mis-interpret Ezekiel.your opinion.


No, he did not. He said they represented Satan in the parable of the sower. It was not a blanket statement. You only say such a thing b/c you're entire argument depends on that point.Ah! So here is your basis for saying a bird(s) must ALWAYS be bad in the parables?!?! You're twisting Jesus' words to mean that all parables have to follow the symbolism of that one parable. Why not just take the statement for what it says?twisting nothing. it is what he said


Frankly, I don't think it's worth continuing this conversation any further if you insist on interpreting the birds in Ezekiel negatively. Nothing in the context suggests that.Nothing in the context?
I said
"God exalted the low tree -Nebuchadnezzar --represented as Babylon"

JFB
Eze 17:23
under it ... all fowl — the Gospel “mustard tree,” small at first, but at length receiving all under its covert (Mat_13:32); the antithesis to Antichrist, symbolized by Assyria, of which the same is said (Eze_31:6), and Babylon (Dan_4:12). Antichrist assumes in mimicry the universal power really belonging to Christ.

Darby
Eze 17:1-24
Chapter 17 present the judgment of Zedekiah for despising the oath that Nebuchadnezzar made him take in the name of Jehovah. Israel not having been able to stand in integrity before God, Jehovah had committed the kingdom to the head of the Gentiles, whom He had raised up.


I just hope you realize you're reading your negative interpretation into Ezekiel and then using that negative interpretation of Ezekiel to support your negative interpretation of Jesus' parable and then using that negative interpretation of Jesus' parable to support your negative interpretation of Ezekiel and so on and so on! It's incredibly circular.Amen!


All that being said, I can see why you interpret the parable negatively (I used to myself). I can't see why you interpret Ezekiel negatively (that's just flat out bad interpretation in my opinion). But let me ask you a more practical question:

Even though I totally disagree with your interpretation, I recognize a truism in the point such an interpretation makes. Yes, there is some corruption, a lot of it, in the visible church. And even though you totally disagree with the scholarly interpretation, I'm sure you recognize a truism in the point such an interpretation makes. Yes, the true Kingdom of God did start small and humbly and grew with time.

So both points have truth in them, even though only one of them is the proper interpretation. No?I posted scholarly interpretations that agree with me. I do not totally disagree with the scholarly interpretation.

Yes! The 'true kingdom of God' started small and grew over time.

Mar 4:26 And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground;
Mar 4:27 And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how.
Mar 4:28 For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear.
Mar 4:29 But when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come.
There are no tares at harvest here.

Sirus
Oct 27th 2009, 02:07 AM
So if the woman is the church and she hid leaven in the meal. What is the leaven? Without spiritualizing.The woman is not the Church. Did you read this?

BTW; Darby also agrees with some of my views. He also answers Beckrl concerning the woman seen throughout scripture as a religious system, as does Scofield.
Darby
That which had been sown as a grain of mustard-seed becomes a great tree; a symbol that represents a great power in the earth. The Assyrian, Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, are set before us in the word as great trees. Such would be the form of the kingdom, which began in littleness through the word sown by the Lord, and afterwards by His disciples. That which this seed produced would gradually assume the form of a great power, making itself prominent on the earth, so that others would shelter themselves under it, as birds under the branches of a tree. This has, indeed, been the case.

We next find that it would not only be a great tree in the earth, but that the kingdom would be characterised as a system of doctrine, which would diffuse itself — a profession, which would enclose all it reached within its sphere of influence. The whole of the three measures would be leavened. I need not dwell here on the fact that the word leaven is always used in a bad sense by the sacred writers; but the Holy Ghost gives us to understand that it is not the regenerative power of the word in the heart of an individual, bringing him back to God; neither is it simply a power acting by outward strength, such as Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, and the other great trees of scripture. But it is a system of doctrine that should characterise the mass, pervading it throughout. It is not faith properly so called, nor is it life. It is a religion; it is Christendom. A profession of doctrine, in hearts which will bear neither the truth nor God, connects itself always with corruption in the doctrine itself.

Scofield
A woman, in the bad ethical sense, always symbolizes something out of place, religiously

In Thyatira, it was a woman teaching.
The woman is the religious/political corrupt and corrupting system. That system is Satan/enemy/wicked one, in the branches, that sows tares (children of the wicked) amongst the wheat. The church is the bread -the unleavened body of Christ- as goykodesh pointed out. The leaven, corruption of the children of the wicked one, is false believers, hypocrisy, false doctrine, and worldliness (leaven of Herod) that is hid in the bread, the body of Christ, for the purpose of growth.

I did not spiritualize beyond the scriptural definitions given for leaven.

Sirus
Oct 27th 2009, 02:18 AM
So you're claiming the entire church of Christ is corrupted?The Church? No. The visible church? Mostly. Corporately Israel was blinded because of their unbelief. This did not include all Israeli's. A Jew is not one outwardly, but inwardly. Same with the visible church. Most are corrupt and are corrupting. Many go the way of destruction. Few find and follow the narrow path.

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 27th 2009, 02:46 AM
The Church? No. The visible church? Mostly. Corporately Israel was blinded because of their unbelief. This did not include all Israeli's. A Jew is not one outwardly, but inwardly. Same with the visible church. Most are corrupt and are corrupting. Many go the way of destruction. Few find and follow the narrow path.

But the parable does not say:

"The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was MOSTLY leavened."

Instead the parable says:

"The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was ALL leavened."

And I think the biggest point here is missed here in this whole parable.

Jesus did not say: "The kingdom of heaven is like three measures of flour, and a woman took and hid in it leaven till it was all leavened."

Instead, Jesus said:
"The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened."

The flour and the bread is not the kingdom of heaven. The flour and the bread is something external to the kingdom of heaven. The leaven here is refered to as the kingdom of heaven.

So by the interpretation you're proposing, the kingdom of heaven = corruption?
The kingdom of heaven = evil?

:confused

Sirus
Oct 28th 2009, 02:53 AM
Yes, I was wrong to say no about the church.
You asked about the church.
"So you're claiming the entire church of Christ is corrupted?"The church is not the kingdom of God. Jesus said the kingdom of God was in the corrupt pharisees. Where they the church? Was the church in them? Was the entire kingdom in anyone?
The kingdom of God in scripture is discussed in a very wide spectrum.
Now you are asking about the kingdom of heaven -the visible church- which is not just the visible church but also the political system of the world.

However you are correct that 'all is leavened' is said for both.
To answer your question we first have to address this;
"The flour and the bread is not the kingdom of heaven. The flour and the bread is something external to the kingdom of heaven. The leaven here is refered to as the kingdom of heaven."
This is not at all correct. The kingdom of heaven is like.....all that follows. That would be;
leaven
woman
meal

If we apply your method of interpretation to the previous parable, the kingdom of heaven is only "a grain of mustard seed" and is not "the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof". So if you, like others, interpret this to mean gentiles, the gentiles don't quite make it into the kingdom do they?

The kingdom of heaven is like.....all that follows.

So yes, a little leaven leaven all. The church at Corinth were called brethren, they had leaven in their church, and were told to purge else all would be leavened.
We have all been effected by false doctrine, even this very moment, wouldn't you say?
The church either has or does reach apostasy, wouldn't you say?
We are told to cleanse ourselves of all filthiness of the flesh AND spirit, are we not?
The gospel was corrupt in the days of the apostles was it not?
The Church is not perfect is it?

So here the kingdom of God refers to the spiritual aspects of God's kingdom on earth ruled by man, told to occupy til he returns.
The kingdom of heaven refers to the visible earthly political aspects of God's kingdom on earth ruled by man, NOT told to occupy til he returns.
It is not talking about Christ's body in position, but Christ's body in action before perfection.

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 28th 2009, 04:27 AM
Jesus said the kingdom of God was in the corrupt pharisees. Where they the church? Was the church in them? Was the entire kingdom in anyone?

When did Jesus say that the kingdom of God was in the corrupt Pharisees? Which verse is that? I wasn't aware of this teaching.


The kingdom of God in scripture is discussed in a very wide spectrum.
Now you are asking about the kingdom of heaven -the visible church- which is not just the visible church but also the political system of the world.

Where in Scripture does Jesus say that the Kingdom of God is not just the visible church but also the political system of the world? I have not come across any such description so I need to see the verse to understand where you're coming from.


However you are correct that 'all is leavened' is said for both.
To answer your question we first have to address this;
"The flour and the bread is not the kingdom of heaven. The flour and the bread is something external to the kingdom of heaven. The leaven here is refered to as the kingdom of heaven."
This is not at all correct. The kingdom of heaven is like.....all that follows. That would be;
leaven
woman
meal

I guess that is a reasonable view, and it applies to certain parables when Jesus clearly describes it this way. But I would disagree in the case of this parable.

And consistently in all the parables, the kingdom of heaven represents God's kingdom in the hearts of men who are true believers.

Jesus teaches us the mysteries of the kingdom, how it works, how it will be like in the future (from the perspective of 30AD) in the parable of the mustard seed and leaven, how it functions in the hearts of true believers in the parable of the pearl and the hidden treasure, what kind of people it'll attract, both true and false followers in the parable of the net and the sower, etc.

Here are some examples:

The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field,
- man: God
- good seed: true believers, because when these seed were grown they became wheat which the master then reaped and stored into his barn
- kingdom of heaven: likened to God planting good seed in the world, the kingdom is not corrupted

The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field.
- kingdom of heaven: mustard seed
- man: God
- field: world
- kingdom of heaven not corrupted

Mat 13:44 "The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up.
- kingdom of heaven: treasure hidden in a field
- man: true believer
- result: true believer values kingdom of God most highly

Mat 13:45 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls,
Mat 13:46 who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it.
- kingdom of heaven: likened to a true searcher of God searching for a philosophy/religion of utmost value
- pearl of great value: the true God

Mat 13:47 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and gathered fish of every kind.
- kingdom of heaven (or rather the words of the kingdom of heaven): net that gathers in all sorts of fish
- fish: true and false believers
- note again: kingdom of heaven is not corrupted, it is pure but it also brings in the bad fish which also hear the words of the kingdom, but are corrupt and unrepentant and thrown away

When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart.
- again, the words of the kingdom is not corrupted
- the words of the kingdom (not the kingdom itself) draws all kinds of people with different hearts
- the true believer bears fruit 30, 60 and 100x


If we apply your method of interpretation to the previous parable, the kingdom of heaven is only "a grain of mustard seed" and is not "the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof". So if you, like others, interpret this to mean gentiles, the gentiles don't quite make it into the kingdom do they?

No, because the Gentiles come and make their nests in it, seeking refuge under its branches and finding rest and safety in the kingdom.



So yes, a little leaven leaven all. The church at Corinth were called brethren, they had leaven in their church, and were told to purge else all would be leavened.
We have all been effected by false doctrine, even this very moment, wouldn't you say?

I won't say we have all been affected by false doctrine, because in every generation God preserves a remnant for Himself. Much of what is highly visible and passes off as Christianity is false, I submit to that, but God's true church in many parts of the world remain true, and many true believers still suffer affliction, perseuction and remain true to his doctrines and follow him.

And God promised us that
1) If we truly will to do His will, we will know true doctrine from false

Joh 7:17 If any man will do his (i.e. God's) will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

Jer 29:13 You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

This clearly teaches us something. I'll go off on a tangent for a little while to explain something that is relevant to some of these parables. People go after false doctrine because of one reason only. It is not God whom they truly seek after or love. They may profess to seek God but they are not really seeking God.

People seek lots of things in their profession of faith: materialism, escape from damnation, safety and protection, blessings, self-esteem, health and wellness, a sense of fulfillment, a sense of self-righteousness, spirituality, soothing for a troubled conscience, respect from others, friendship and community,miraculous giftings, etc.

But all these things (I believe) do not really lead a person to true saving faith. It is only at the point at which a person says: God, I love you for all that you have done for me, and I worship you for who you are. I am a wretched sinner with no good in my self, and I fling myself at your mercy at your feet, have pity on me. I will serve you and follow you regardless of what you'll do with me. Here I am, do with me as you please. I believe this is the only kind of people God truly saves, going by the Gospel accounts and by Paul's writings, as well as my own experience (which is nothing but it does confirm what I see in Scripture).

So I do not agree that we are ALL leavened, because if we are ALL leavened (if leaven is evil like you say) then when Christ comes back during the rapture, there will be no one alive to rapture. But Christ tells us otherwise.



The church either has or does reach apostasy, wouldn't you say?

No. It is a mistake to lump in the true sheep of Christ and the true church from anyone who professes Christ. Remember, the Bible tells us that many of the Pharisees and the priests also believed in Jesus, but they dare not confess him and openly follow him because they were afraid to be put out of the synagogue. Paul tells us that such believers are not true believers.

The same people who were shouting "Hosanna, Blessed is the King of Israel" on Palm Sunday were the same crowd who later chanted "Crucify him" when he did not meet their expectations and desires.

The true church is not in apostasy. The bible clearly tells us that they (the false churches in our day) are the servants of Satan and false apostles who dress like real apostles but their master is Satan.

2Co 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
2Co 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
2Co 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Thus no, the apostates clearly are not the church.


We are told to cleanse ourselves of all filthiness of the flesh AND spirit, are we not?
The gospel was corrupt in the days of the apostles was it not?

No, the Gospel was not corrupt, but false apostles who were working for Satan attempted to corrupt it. Even up till today, many people still preach the pure and true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Look up Paul Washer on youtube, he is the best example I know of.


The Church is not perfect is it?

No, but it is not corrupt and it is not evil. Perfection and corrupt/evil are very different. One is a little short of perfection, the other goes the other way to the extreme.


So here the kingdom of God refers to the spiritual aspects of God's kingdom on earth ruled by man, told to occupy til he returns.
The kingdom of heaven refers to the visible earthly political aspects of God's kingdom on earth ruled by man, NOT told to occupy til he returns.
It is not talking about Christ's body in position, but Christ's body in action before perfection.

I'm sorry to disagree, but I do not read any of that in this parable at all.

Sirus
Oct 28th 2009, 04:45 AM
I haven't read the rest of the post but will after I post this. I'll have to reply to anything else tomorrow.
When did Jesus say that the kingdom of God was in the corrupt Pharisees? Which verse is that? I wasn't aware of this teaching.He specifically answered the pharisees.....
then he said to the disciples...
Luk 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Luk 17:22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 28th 2009, 06:04 AM
I haven't read the rest of the post but will after I post this. I'll have to reply to anything else tomorrow.He specifically answered the pharisees.....
then he said to the disciples...
Luk 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Luk 17:22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.


I think it is quite clear what Jesus meant here? Jesus wasn't saying the kingdom of God was in the Pharisees, he was just correcting their wrong expectations of the kingdom of God coming through the Messiah.

Luk 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
- Some background information. Jesus was preaching "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!"
- The Pharisees and the Jews in general during that time expected that the kingdom of God was going to be set up as a physical kingdom immediately with the coming of the Messiah. This was because of the prophecies given in Daniel, the prophecy of the statue of gold, silver, iron and iron mixed with clay, the prophecy of the beasts, etc. all describe the different world powers coming to dominate Israel and the world at large.
- What was not clear was that there was to be a time gap between the kingdom of Rome (the legs of iron) during Jesus' time and the final European power out of which will come the Antichrist, whom Jesus will destroy.
- thus it is with this understanding that the Pharisees were enquiring of Jesus, when will this kingdom come?
- Thus Jesus explains that the kingdom of God is not going to come in a physical sense...

Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
- ... and it is not something tangible that we can see physically
- but rather that the kingdom of God comes in the hearts of men, working in secret and saving men's souls who are then added into God's kingdom

Sirus
Oct 30th 2009, 02:24 AM
I think it is quite clear what Jesus meant here? Jesus wasn't saying the kingdom of God was in the Pharisees, he was just correcting their wrong expectations of the kingdom of God coming through the Messiah.Wrong as can be!
What's the next 2 verses say?
Luk 17:24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.
Luk 17:25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.
Referring to His second coming.
Now, what's funny about this is that you do affirm a spiritual kingdom within

Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
- but rather that the kingdom of God comes in the hearts of men, working in secret and saving men's souls who are then added into God's kingdomyet we see both spoken about in the text.
Jesus was in fact referring to the spirit in them.

ThyWordIsTruth
Oct 30th 2009, 02:42 AM
Please read the verse carefully.

Luk 17:20 Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed,
Luk 17:21 nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or 'There!' for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you."

-Here Jesus speaks of the KINGDOM of God. It comes in the hearts of men.


Luk 17:22 And he said to the disciples, "The days are coming when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it.

- Now, Christ turns from talking about the Kingdom to talking of his own person. Jesus will ascend into heaven, his disciples will wish he were still with them, but will see him no more till they reunite with the Lord in death

Luk 17:23 And they will say to you, 'Look, there!' or 'Look, here!' Do not go out or follow them.
Luk 17:24 For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day.

- here he is telling us the nature of his return and 2nd coming, which is different from the Kingdom of God.

Luk 17:25 But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.

Again, this says nothing about the kingdom of God IN the Pharisees, thus your point is invalid anyway. Feel free, however, to hold on to your leaven = evil view. Let's agree to disagree.

Sirus
Oct 30th 2009, 02:50 AM
Where in Scripture does Jesus say that the Kingdom of God is not just the visible church but also the political system of the world? I have not come across any such description so I need to see the verse to understand where you're coming from.I said kingdom of heaven. We have been discussing it at length. Go back and read my replies and quotes of Darby and Scofield in this thread to see the (woman) system.


I guess that is a reasonable view, and it applies to certain parables when Jesus clearly describes it this way. But I would disagree in the case of this parable.For what reason do you disagree?


And consistently in all the parables, the kingdom of heaven represents God's kingdom in the hearts of men who are true believers.No. The kingdom of God represents God's kingdom in the hearts of men who are true believers.


No, because the Gentiles come and make their nests in it, seeking refuge under its branches and finding rest and safety in the kingdom.Been through this a few times now. Jesus said the fowls are Satan/wicked one/devil.


No. It is a mistake to lump in the true sheep of Christ and the true church from anyone who professes Christ. Was it a mistake for the Spirit to speak of Israel generally and say they were blinded and broken off? No. Some Israeli's believed. Why then can we not say the Church generally reaches apostasy as scripture claims?


The true church is not in apostasy. The bible clearly tells us that they (the false churches in our day) are the servants of Satan and false apostles who dress like real apostles but their master is Satan.

2Co 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
2Co 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
2Co 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Thus no, the apostates clearly are not the church.Again, you are not separating general-all from all as the Spirit did for Israel.


No, the Gospel was not corrupt
2Co 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
This is not the written word here. This is the word of God, news of God, matter of God, thing of God, message of God -the gospel


but false apostles who were working for Satan attempted to corrupt it. Even up till today, many people still preach the pure and true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Look up Paul Washer on youtube, he is the best example I know of.Again, you are not separating general-all from all as the Spirit did for Israel. In general apostate does not mena there is not a remnant. I like Paul Washer for His boldness, but do not agree with him much theologically. No surprise.


No, but it is not corrupt and it is not evil.Generally no? It's not? Could have fooled me but you can't fool scripture.