Posted on 01/24/2011 6:47:38 AM PST by topcat54
Most people don’t realize that many if not most of Jesus’ parables were intended not as general morality tales, but as particular pronouncements of coming judgment and change. Jesus was warning Jerusalem to repent and to accept its new King (Jesus) or else fall under ultimate condemnation of God. In fact, much of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels pertains primarily to that pre-AD 70 crowd, and without reading it in this light, we misunderstand it. And when we misunderstand it, we misapply it.
The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares (Weeds)
For many (perhaps even most) Christians, the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matt. 13:24–30, 36–43) tells the story of the final judgment. This view is especially understandable when based on the old King James translation. It says:
Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. 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.
After a couple of other related parables, Jesus leaves the multitude and goes into a house. His disciples, having not understood the parable but wishing to avoid the embarrassment of saying so publicly, come to him in private and ask that he explain it. He obliges:
He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 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; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear. (My emphases.)
Two things primarily have lent this parable to being understood: 1) It has so often been taught as an end-of-the-world parable about final judgment, and 2) the popular KJV clearly says that this gathering, separating, and burning judgment shall occur “in the end of this world” (vv. 39, 40).
This reading clearly makes the verse connect with verse 38: “The field is the world.” It makes it pretty clear that the “world” in which the two strains grow shall be the same “world” that comes to an end. Thus the harvest and separation and judgment take place at the end of the world.
But this translation is simply inaccurate. Verse 38 is correct to say “world,” for the Greek word is kosmos—a common Greek word translated “world.” It refers to the entire system of this planet and the order of things. But the word is entirely different in the following verses. In 39 and 40, the Greek word is aion, from which we get our word “eon.” It refers to a long period of time, and is properly translated “age.” Most modern translations get this correct (ESV, NAS, etc.), and even modern printings of the King James include footnotes with the proper reading. Why the old KJV translated it as “world” is another mystery.
A correct translation here is indispensible for properly understanding this parable and its explanation. It more correctly reads:
The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the close of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age (ESV).
This is not a perfect translation, but it gets the important point for this discussion. The thing coming to an end in this teaching is not the world itself, but a particular long period of time. Jesus is not concerned with the end of the world, but the end of the age. And the judgment that is described here, therefore, pertains to the end of that period of time.
The question arises then, what particular period of time is this speaking of? It is possible (and perhaps tempting to many) to make this age synonymous with the end of all time, and thus an end of the world. But is this what Jesus has in mind here?
“This Age”
I don’t think Jesus has the ultimate end of time in view here. Rather, he had in mind the end of a particular age that would be followed by another. This is clear from teaching He had given just earlier that same day (see Matt. 13:1). He had warned the people and the Pharisees against the unpardonable sin: “And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Matt. 12:32).
Here Jesus speaks about this age and the age to come, in both of which the same rules for belief and profession of faith stand. This shows that he had His current age in mind—“this age” was His age that would obviously give way to another age yet to come (for His listeners anyway).
In fact, many of the Greek manuscripts for Matthew 13:40 also include the word “this” and read “The harvest is the close of this age.” While the word is missing from the oldest manuscripts we have, its attestation in a large portion of texts should not be ignored totally.
This understanding of two ages occurs in Paul’s teaching as well. For example, Jesus is the ascended reigning King, “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age (aion) but also in the one to come” (Eph. 1:21). He then applies these two ages to the rescuing of believers from the spirit of the age:
And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course [aion, “age”] of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience. . . . But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus (Eph. 2:1–7).
Paul very clearly saw the same two ages Jesus did: one age that was currently operating when he wrote, and another age that would dominate the future. The question then is, when does the switch between these ages occur?
Paul very clearly indicates that a switch was occurring as he wrote, and indeed the old age (which we might call the Old Testament age) was coming to an end as he wrote. In Ephesians 3:8–11, he notes the cause of the change. He says he was given grace to preach the gospel unto the Gentiles,
to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things, so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose that he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Noting the cause of the change also dates it. God has kept the gospel revelation hidden for ages, the apostle says, but now (as he wrote) He has brought it to light. In other words, the coming of Christ and the work of Christ has effected the beginning of a change in the ages.
Paul repeats this same teaching in Colossians 1. He explains his ministry as delivering the Word of God, “the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints” (Col. 1:26). It is clear, then, that a vital change in God’s providence over the ages has taken place with the coming of Christ.
But was Paul’s and Jesus’ “this age” actually coming to an end when Paul wrote, or will it yet be in our future? Paul makes this clear as well, in 1 Corinthians 10. After recounting several stories from Exodus, Paul teaches: “Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our [his and his audience’s] instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor. 10:11). It is clear from this that Paul saw himself at the end of an age—an age typified by judgment upon disobedient people.
The author of Hebrews uses a very similar expression in relation to the work of Christ: “But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Heb. 9:26). It is clear here that the end of that old time period arrived in conjunction with the crucifixion of Christ.
So, from the teaching of Jesus, Paul, and the author of Hebrews, we get a very clear picture of two primary ages: one that endured up until the time of Christ, and another than began around that same period. I believe these two periods, being hinged upon the coming and work of Christ, pertain obviously to the Old and New Covenant administrations. Indeed, this is what the author of Hebrews himself relates. He says the New Covenant makes the Old obsolete: “And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away” (Heb. 8:13). Notice, the New had in fact made the Old obsolete definitively. But as he wrote, in his time, the Old was becoming obsolete and was ready to vanish away. It had not yet been completely wiped out, but it was certainly in its dying moments.
It died in AD 70, when the symbol and ceremonies of that Old system—the Temple and sacrifices—were completely destroyed by the Roman armies. This was the definitive moment when the “this age” of Jesus and Paul ended and completely gave way to their “age to come.” This, of course, is exactly why Jesus had tied “the end of the age” to His prophecy of the destruction of the Temple:
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?”
The apostles clearly understood Jesus now. Remember, earlier in Matthew 13 they had to ask him to explain the parable of the wheat and tares. He expounded then about the end of the age and judgment upon the children of the enemy. He had clearly and often identified the Pharisees as children of the enemy, and them and their disciples and children of hell (gehenna—see Matt. 23:15). The disciples this time immediately connected the dots with Jesus’ pronouncement upon the Temple (Matt. 24:2): it must be linked with the “end of the age” Jesus taught about earlier. So they asked him now to explain the “close of the age.”
Indeed, it was linked. Jesus went on to expound all of the judgments that would come upon Jerusalem and the unbelieving children of the enemy (24:4–25:45).
The Judgment of the Age
A clear understanding of the parable of the wheat and tares emerges only after the proper translation of aion (age) and the biblical teaching concerning the two ages. It is clear that Jesus did not have in mind the end of the world, nor did He mean the final judgment. Rather, Matthew 13:24–30, 36–43 describe the judgment that would come upon unbelieving Jerusalem. During this time, the angels would “gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity” (13:41) and these would be judged with fire. Many of them literally were burned in fire during the destruction of Jerusalem. During this same time, however, the elect of Christ—“the children of the kingdom” (v. 38)—will be harvested. While the explanation of the parable does not tell us their final end, the parable itself has the householder instructing the harvesters to “gather the wheat into my barn.” In other words, they are protected and saved by God.
This, of course, is exactly what happened to the Christians. Not only were they saved in soul, but they mostly fled Jerusalem before the Roman siege. This was consequent to Jesus’ advice to flee and not look back once the signs arose (Matt. 24:16–22); indeed this would correspond with the angels’ work of harvesting the elect (24:30). Indeed, Christians in Jerusalem sold their houses and land during this time before Rome marched in (Acts 4:32–37); they used the proceeds to help each other. They have no intention of staying in Jerusalem; they knew better based on divine forewarning.
The separation of wheat and tares, then, pertained to the destruction of Jerusalem and the separation of God’s true fruit-bearing people from the weeds, the unbelieving Jews of that time. Ironically, this interpretation gets to the heart of the picture in the parable. A “tare” was not simply any old weed, but a particular weed called a “darnel” or zizania in Greek. It looked almost exactly like wheat in early stages of growth and required close examination to tell the difference. In later stages, the difference grows clear, but then it is too late to remove the darnel without damaging the wheat (as the parable says). Worse yet, the darnel kernels are poisonous, causing dizziness, sickness, and possibly even death when eaten. In short, they could look like the real thing, but they were poison; and after a while, their true colors showed. This was exactly the story with the rebellious Jews. They looked like God’s people, but they were really the children of the enemy—they even killed God’s prophets (Matt. 23:30–39). And the longer history went on, the more their true nature as the children of wrath was revealed.
Thus the parable describes the then-soon-coming end of that old age and the destruction of its children, and the beginning of the gathering in of the true children of God’s kingdom. It should not be understood as teaching anything beyond this.
Mustard Seeds and Leaven
Immediately consequent to the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus told the parables of the mustard seed (Matt. 13:31–32) and of the leaven (Matt. 13:33).
There is much to say about these that I will not have the space to say today. Here is the basic thrust:
Following His teaching that there was a coming separation between the children of the enemy and the children of the kingdom, Jesus immediately describes the nature of the growth of the kingdom. The parable of the mustard seed:
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. 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.”
And the leaven:
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 both cases, we have something small growing into something large. Both grow slowly; both grow imperceptibly. This all relates to the New Testament age. A tiny group of disciples was saved from the destruction of Jerusalem. Over time they have grown to fill the world. This did not occur overnight, but gradually. There is still much work to be done, much growth to be had. This, too, will occur gradually and slowly.
The unique emphasis in the mustard seed parable is proportion. A tiny seed grows to house and support the fowls of the air. This is a nothing short of miraculous—certainly beyond the normal expectations of a small group starting a movement. That which is at first seemingly insignificant becomes that on which life rests and depends.
The unique emphasis in the leaven parable is pervasiveness. Not only does something small grow to become large, but it spreads and permeates the whole. In this we learn that the kingdom will eventually Christianize the whole world. Its influence will permeate all people, places, things everywhere. Yet, again, this will happen slowly and imperceptibly over time.
Jesus tied the separation and judgment of the wheat and tares to the change in the “age,” or covenantal administration. From this, we must understand the beginning of the gradual growth of the kingdom as beginning with the gathering of those children of the kingdom. It is for this reason that the two brief growth parables are sandwiched in the text between the parable of wheat and tares (vv. 24–30) and its private explanation (vv. 36–43). They all go together.
Conclusion
It should be clear from this much that Jesus did not predict the end of the world in the parable of the wheat and the tares. Instead, He indicates the end and destruction of the old covenant age, and announces the salvation of the children of the kingdom. This true kingdom will then grow and spread gradually throughout the age to come—the age in which we now live—until it spreads through the whole world. These parables, therefore, go together to illustrate more fully Jesus’ message of the then-coming kingdom of heaven.
Well what a relief! Sin was “put away” once and for all already back then! The author of this article would have us believe that all the promises of a sinless world have already happened! No sin in the world today folks! We are living in a sinless world! Only Satan would have us believe that. The ideas in the article come straight from the pit of hell.
>> This true kingdom will then grow and spread gradually throughout the age to come—the age in which we now live—until it spreads through the whole world.<<
Look up the term Dominionism folks. The author of this article, from the statement above, would have us believe that the world has been getting better and better and more under the rule of Jesus and will ultimately by the influence of Christians become totally a Christian world. In fact they believe that the world must be totally Christian before Jesus can return physically. That’s the same thing Islam teaches its people. That Islam must conquer the entire world before their version of paradise can happen. Satan is alive and working in the world today. Dominionism is humanism in it’s worst form trying to deceive“even the very elect”.
II Corinthians 11:
3But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
4For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming {greek-disguising} themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
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.
BTW, did you figure out you were mistranslating “end of the age” in Matthew 24:3?
If you misinterpret the words of the Bible and adopt your own understanding, rather than letting the Bible speak for itself, you will never come to the truth.
He’s not saying there is no more sin, but that the justification by faith in Jesus is the final and only acceptable antidote to our sin nature and God’s righteous wrath. He also didn’t say the world is getting better and better, only that the influence of Christ would permeate the world, stirring up either worship or rebellion. It is the clarification of who are the sheep and the goats. You might try extending a little grace before jumping to conclusions.
>> BTW, did you figure out you were mistranslating “end of the age” in Matthew 24:3?<<
Whether we use age or world makes no difference although perhaps age, to some, would be more meaningful. Many times we use the term “this world” in the sense of the world around us as we see it. It doesn’t mean “this planet”.
Dominionists and Preterists would have us believe that we are now in “the age to come” which is preposterous. Any serious study of the phrase “the age to come” would show that the age we live in is not what Jesus meant by that phrase.
If you haven’t done so I would suggest that you study what Dominionists believe. I am not jumping to conclusions.
And that statement indicates why you don’t get it. He didn’t use the word “world.” You used it, incorrectly, in your feeble attempt to discredit the preterist interpretation of Matthew 24.
Christ and His disciples were speaking of a particular “age” which has nothing to do with futurist dispensationalism. You refuse to investigate the Bible’s use of terms and phrase, preferring the modern futurist speculation.
Dominionists and Preterists would have us believe that we are now in “the age to come” which is preposterous.
How then would you speak of the old covenant age (the end of which was Jesus referent to His disciples in Matt. 24) with the new covenant age? That age was coming to a swift close. When Jesus spoke of the complete and total destruction of the Jewish temple, the disciples knew exactly what He was talking about.
5 Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said,
6 "These things which you see-- the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down."
7 So they asked Him, saying, "Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?"
…
20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near.
21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her.
22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. (Luke 21)
Any serious study of the phrase “the age to come” would show that the age we live in is not what Jesus meant by that phrase
Talk is cheap. We’re waiting.
Does your futurist definition of the phase “age to come” include or exclude the so-called millennial kingdom?
This is another key indicator to help us correctly interpret Matthew 24 as referring to the events in the first century, aka the end of the age.
People might get the impression that you are having some success with your attempts to discredit biblical preterism, but all you are doing is running from one losing fight to another. We end up scratching the surface and finding out, in fact, that futurism is the empty theology of pure speculation.
>> Talk is cheap. We’re waiting.<<
Already did mine. I’ve made up my mind. Oh, you thought I was going to post some long winded reply to that? NOT. It’s up to each to make up their own mind with the help of the Holy Spirit. Don’t wait on me.
By all means, only make sure you read the original source material. The hard core futurists have a difficult time articulating what preterist postmils actually believe.
Here’s a good start: He Shall Have Dominion by Ken Gentry. (The entire book is free online.) Then you can honestly judge whether CB has accurately described the alternative position.
And proved it was inadequate by confusing the simple words “age” and “world.” Perhaps that is what your prophecy pimps told you. That is not what the Bible teaches.
This demonstrates the folly of the futurist trying to critique another system when their own is built on a house of cards.
No, actually I didn’t based on past experience.
>>BTW, I know it’s easy to get sidetracked, but I don’t think I saw your response regarding your questionable article on the meaning of the phrase “this generation .”<<
You didn’t get one. Getting into a long discussion with you on what is is just wastes my time. Although I have re-inforced my own bliefs. I’ll just alert people to what you are trying to do and let them do their own study.
Like you’ve done, or a real study from original material?
Here is a description of what Gentry is trying to establish in his book. This is a quote from the first page when directed to his book online.
“Two centuries ago, Protestant Christians believed that they would die before Jesus came back to earth. This affected the way they thought, prayed, worked, and saved. They built for the future. They were future-oriented. They were upper-class.”
The materialistic outlook of this book and Dominionism in general is directly conflicting with what Jesus taught.
Matthew 6:25 Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes?
Luke 12:22 And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on.
Matthew 6:19 Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.
Dominionists on the other hand would have you plan, prepare and focus on your life “in this world”. Just listen to their arguments about how the “futurists” rob people of their future “here on earth”. Their major focus is this world not the world Jesus told us to focus on.
Jesus even said in Luke 12:32-34 Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
But Dominionists will mock you and scoff at you if you even express something like that. Are they mocking Jesus own words? I think they are.
For those who follow the Dominionist thinking of “They were future-oriented. They were upper-class” I would suggest you look at the loses in pension savings etc. and consider this verse.
James 5:1-6 1 Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. 2 Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten. 3 Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.
The following verse should serve as a warning to those thinking of following the Dominionist way.
Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.
And Paul’s admonition 2 Cor. 4:18. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.
Make up your own mind. Gentry or Jesus?
While I realize that “one liners” and misinterpretation are the stock in trade of futurist scholarship, I really would encourage you to read the entire book if you want to get a better understanding of what a reformed worldview is all about.
Then you'll be able to engage in intelligent discourse.
This is actually quite amusing coming from one who believes in a future carnal kingdom of God on earth with a literal throne, a human priesthood, and ongoing animal sacrifices. The height of sensuality and materialism.
Oh, I’m sure you’ll give us the old standard dispensational line about the Church vs. Israel. But that’s a phony argument from the get go. It’s like shadow boxing in the dark.
>>I really would encourage you to read the entire book if you want to get a better understanding of what a reformed worldview is all about.<<
I’ve read enough of the Dominionist view to know that they focus on the control of this world. Listen to your own comments. Many focus on the problem you see that those you call “futurists” in that they don’t concentrate on dominion in this world both spiritually and physically. You try to get people to focus on their life in this world, Jesus did the exact opposite.
Well then I encourage you to go back and read the original material because obviously it did not take the first time. So much confusion and misstatements. You’re a caricature of all that is wrong with futurist “scholarship.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.