The Parable of the Wedding Feast

[Glass*Soul]

Before replying to this topic, please read the caveat below.*

Here is the Parable of the Wedding Feast from Matthew 22:

Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come. “Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.’
“But they paid no attention and went off—one to his field, another to his business. The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them. The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.
“Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. So go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.’ So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, the bad as well as the good, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.
“But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. He asked, ‘How did you get in here without wedding clothes, friend ?’ The man was speechless.
“Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’
“For many are invited, but few are chosen.”

I have three questions to start:

1. Who is the king in this story?
2. Who is the guest who was not wearing wedding clothes?
3. When Jesus starts a parable with the phrase, "The kingdom of heaven is like..." what is he signalling?

I've recently been looking at this parable in a new way. I think the answers to these questions are extremely important as to how one experiences Christianity. What do you think?



Now for the caveat.


*I will no longer discuss my atheism or respond to any attempts to convert me expect in this thread. I am doing this so that I can have reasonable discussions of other topics. If you go against my caveat and attempt to bring up my atheism here I will not respond. I will simply quietly put you on ignore until the topic is played out. After that, all is forgiven. I will take you off ignore and we will start with a fresh slate. If that means this topic will be nothing but crickets chirping, then so be it.

 

[talitha]

1. The King is obviously God.
2. First of all, in the custom of the day when Jesus was telling the story, I understand that it was common for special wedding garments to be provided for the occasion by the family. Everyone would put this garment on over his own clothes, and for one thing the garment showed that this person was in fact supposed to be there and wasn't a crasher. This guy in the parable was for whatever reason refusing to identify himself with the king's family but still expecting the free buffet and wet bar. This would be someone who wants the ticket out of hell but does not want to really be a Christian, identifying himself as a friend of Yahweh.
3. The stories that Jesus told beginning with the phrase "the kingdom of Heaven is like" - I think that he was illustrating for us the spirit or flavor of the reign of God, which would reflect His character. He is a King who requires that we not be ashamed of Him, among other things.

 

[drich0150]

Who is the king in this story?

God.

Who is the guest who was not wearing wedding clothes?

Gentiles.

When Jesus starts a parable with the phrase, "The kingdom of heaven is like..." what is he signalling?

What the Kingdom of Heaven is like..

 

[Johnnz]

1. Who is the king in this story? God
   
2. Who is the guest who was not wearing wedding clothes? Israel
   
3. When Jesus starts a parable with the phrase, "The kingdom of heaven is like..." what is he signalling? Jesus many times announced that God's reign of earth had come with Jesus and had begun, awaiting a final act when earth will be renewed and life will begin in open relationship with the Godhead.

John
NZ

 

[Glass*Soul]

1. The King is obviously God.

I'm not sure this is correct. What makes it obvious to you?

 

[Hospes]

Before replying to this topic, please read the caveat below.*

Here is the Parable of the Wedding Feast from Matthew 22:

I have three questions to start:

1. Who is the king in this story?
2. Who is the guest who was not wearing wedding clothes?
3. When Jesus starts a parable with the phrase, "The kingdom of heaven is like..." what is he signalling?

I've recently been looking at this parable in a new way. I think the answers to these questions are extremely important as to how one experiences Christianity. What do you think?



Now for the caveat.


*I will no longer discuss my atheism or respond to any attempts to convert me expect in this thread. I am doing this so that I can have reasonable discussions of other topics. If you go against my caveat and attempt to bring up my atheism here I will not respond. I will simply quietly put you on ignore until the topic is played out. After that, all is forgiven. I will take you off ignore and we will start with a fresh slate. If that means this topic will be nothing but crickets chirping, then so be it.

The King: God.
The Guest: A person that tries to join the Kingdom of God without being clothed in the righteousness of Christ.
Signal: He is just about to explain a truth regarding God's dominion, i.e where/who God reigns over.

 

[Hospes]

I'm not sure this is correct. What makes it obvious to you?

The king being a reference to God, along with the rest of the parable, "fits" the whole of the Biblical teaching on the kingdom of God. The parable on it's own, without the benefit of other scripture, would be difficult to understand.

Anxiously awaiting your thoughts on the parable!

 

[talitha]

I am struggling here because I don't know how it isn't obvious that the King is God. Who else would be inviting people into the Kingdom of Heaven?

 

[Hestha]

I am struggling here because I don't know how it isn't obvious that the King is God. Who else would be inviting people into the Kingdom of Heaven?

I know I'm not supposed to post here, but...

would the host be either Jesus or one of the disciples/apostles/followers of Jesus, if the host weren't God?

 

[Glass*Soul]

I am struggling here because I don't know how it isn't obvious that the King is God. Who else would be inviting people into the Kingdom of Heaven?

Well, I don't think that the king is inviting people into the kingdom of God. I think he is merely inviting them to a wedding, and one that the leading citizens are adamant about NOT attending. I think that as the story unfolds, one finds out something about the kingdom of God, but that the lesson is revealed in an unexpected place.

An interesting question to ask is why the leading citizens refused to attend the wedding, resisting even to the point of violence, even though it was obvious suicide. They must have had a compelling reason.

I think the original listeners to this story would have realized immediately why not, and that if they whispered amongst themselves why not, they would have kept their whispers discrete.

 

[Glass*Soul]

I know I'm not supposed to post here, but...

would the host be either Jesus or one of the disciples/apostles/followers of Jesus, if the host weren't God?

I don't think so...

I do think someone important to an understanding of what the the kingdom is like is at the feast though.

 

[talitha]

Well, I don't think that the king is inviting people into the kingdom of God. I think he is merely inviting them to a wedding, and one that the leading citizens are adamant about NOT attending.

Yes, they are adamant, and I see that as typical of people who refuse and reject God's invitation. I have been thinking about what might lead a person new to the Bible to see that the king is God, and one thing is that the "weeping and gnashing of teeth" motif appears elsewhere, for example in Matthew 8: "I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” In that scripture it is obvious that the "sons of the kingdom" are Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob's descendents, Israel - because they rejected the son. The parallel to the parable you quoted confirms for me my interpretation.

 

[Hospes]

Well, I don't think that the king is inviting people into the kingdom of God. I think he is merely inviting them to a wedding, and one that the leading citizens are adamant about NOT attending. I think that as the story unfolds, one finds out something about the kingdom of God, but that the lesson is revealed in an unexpected place.

An interesting question to ask is why the leading citizens refused to attend the wedding, resisting even to the point of violence, even though it was obvious suicide. They must have had a compelling reason.

I think the original listeners to this story would have realized immediately why not, and that if they whispered amongst themselves why not, they would have kept their whispers discrete.

Context, context, context. Before and after this parable, look at who Jesus is offending: the Jewish religious leadership. They are the "leading citizens" you mention. You bet the original listeners saw the connections, as seen by the reaction per the verse following this parable: "Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words." (ESV) They understood well what part in the parable they played and hated Jesus for it. Their "compelling reason": Jesus' teaching totally undercut their world. Same reason a lot of folks reject him now. Following Jesus involves death to self. There is an incredibly strong motivation to avoid such death, even if trying to avoid it means suicide.

 

[Glass*Soul]

Context, context, context. Before and after this parable, look at who Jesus is offending: the Jewish religious leadership. They are the "leading citizens" you mention. You bet the original listeners saw the connections, as seen by the reaction per the verse following this parable: "Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words." (ESV) They understood well what part in the parable they played and hated Jesus for it. Their "compelling reason": Jesus' teaching totally undercut their world. Same reason a lot of folks reject him now. Following Jesus involves death to self. There is an incredibly strong motivation to avoid such death, even if trying to avoid it means suicide.

We almost agree...

Context. Who in Matthew had a wedding that people might have objected to attending?

Who in Matthew is noted for his counter form of dressing?

Who in Matthew came to his death as a result of not cooperating regarding a wedding?

Who is the hero in that story?

What does this teach us about the kingdom?

 

[Glass*Soul]

Yes, they are adamant, and I see that as typical of people who refuse and reject God's invitation. I have been thinking about what might lead a person new to the Bible to see that the king is God, and one thing is that the "weeping and gnashing of teeth" motif appears elsewhere, for example in Matthew 8: "I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” In that scripture it is obvious that the "sons of the kingdom" are Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob's descendents, Israel - because they rejected the son. The parallel to the parable you quoted confirms for me my interpretation.

Interestingly, Jesus in Matthew 8 doesn't say who will be throwing them out or why. He does not say that God will be doing the throwing out. He does not say that the children of Israel alone will be thrown out, but that the "subjects" of the kingdom who, it is surprising made apparent by the faith of the Centurion, may be non-Jewish, will be thrown out. People who otherwise would have been safe will be thrown out.

Those who join the kingdom from outside of Judaism will be casting their lot in with a people who are about to come into a terrible suffering. The old Jerusalem is going to get burned and torn down. Their temple destroyed. They are going to lose everything. Quite literally. Very soon.

The challenge is that the being invited in part, the feast part, tends to be spiritual. It is a heavenly kingdom after all. So the feasting may be hard to see or understand sometimes, especially from the outside. But the getting thrown out part, and the teeth gnashing part, can be very visible, immediate and of this world. So, yes. come join the children of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob in a feast. Just know that the feast may be a feast of the starving. If you are still in, if you are OK with losing everything on the level that the Jews are about the suffer, then sit down at the table; you are invited. That is the surprise.

That is how I read it anyway.

 

[toLiJC]

the first invited to the "wedding" in the parable from Matthew 22:1-14 are the unrighteous clerics/spiritual servants, who usually appear (ostensibly) to be the first in God's Kingdom, those who accept the invitation (although as second invited) are the remaining people, the king is God, the "wedding" is the Kingdom of Heaven, the uninvited guest at the celebration is the appearance of the "darkness"

Blessings

 

[Glass*Soul]

the first invited to the "wedding" in the parable from Matthew 22:1-14 are the unrighteous clerics/spiritual servants, who usually appear (ostensibly) to be the first in God's Kingdom, those who accept the invitation (although as second invited) are the remaining people, the king is God, the "wedding" is the Kingdom of Heaven, the uninvited guest at the celebration is the appearance of the "darkness"

Blessings

That's an interesting take on it.

What if the first tier of invitees are those with a little worldly power and the second tier is those who have no power outside of passive resistance?

Compare this story to Jesus' teachings in Matthew 5 about what to do if someone demands your tunic. You are to offer him your cloak also. This places the person making the demand in the position of potentially shaming himself, which is what the nonconforming guest has managed to do to the king at the wedding feast. He manages to turn the king's hale fellow well met playacting and brings out his true, heartless nature.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

A powerless person, one who does not have servants or weapons with which to put up a fight, may not be able to resist when compelled to go to an objectionable wedding of the corrupt and powerful, but he can refuse to dress in garments that would falsely signal his approval.

It gets you thrown out into the outer darkness, but that is where the Gospel takes place. The outer darkness is no big deal. It is certainly better than a corrupt feast. It is where the subjects of the kingdom of heaven can have real feasts while they outwardly appear to be starving.

 

[Glass*Soul]

Context, context, context. Before and after this parable, look at who Jesus is offending: the Jewish religious leadership. They are the "leading citizens" you mention. You bet the original listeners saw the connections, as seen by the reaction per the verse following this parable: "Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words." (ESV) They understood well what part in the parable they played and hated Jesus for it. Their "compelling reason": Jesus' teaching totally undercut their world. Same reason a lot of folks reject him now. Following Jesus involves death to self. There is an incredibly strong motivation to avoid such death, even if trying to avoid it means suicide.

Yes. Look right after the parable. Verses 15 and 16. "Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians." Look who the Pharisees were in cahoots with. The Herodians. The Pharisees knew they had caught Jesus in something the Herodians could use against him and they jumped on the chance. Why would the courtiers or supporters of Herod care about this story? They cared because they and the Pharisees and virtually anyone with ears knew good and well this story was about Herod Antipas, his objectionable marriage and what he did to John the Baptist.

John, famed for his simple and nonconforming style of dress, got his head cut off for objecting to the Marriage of Herod Antipas to his sister-in-law. Herod was able to arrest and jail John, but he could not force his approval nor his conformity. John's head was served up on a platter at one of the most objectionable feasts of all time, ultimately making a fool of Herod and a hero of John.

By the time Jesus told this parable, he had attracted Herod's attention. He had been warned that Herod was after him (Luke 13:31).

The crowd knew why people in the parable didn't want to go to the wedding feast. I can imagine a murmur going through the crowd--a discrete murmur. A careful murmur.

The parable of the wedding feast is about Herod Antipas and John the baptist and it deftly foreshadows what will happen to Jesus.

Soon this same Herod Antipas will play a role in Jesus' trial, plying him with questions, after which Herod's soldiers do ironically force Jesus into sumptuous clothing. Like the hero in the Wedding Feast, Jesus refuses to defend himself before Herod. Like John the Baptist, Jesus is about to be cast into the outer darkness.

This is what the kingdom of heaven is like.

You will probably have no temporal power. Your fight against evil will not be in shows of might and weaponry (think of the Garden of Gethsemane). It will be in passive resistance that pulls the attractive masks off of evil, but potentially at terrible cost to yourself. Look at what happened to John the Baptist. Look at what happened to Jesus. This is what the kingdom of heaven is like. Are you still in? Because you are invited to the feast.

 

[bling]

First off: Everything Jesus said about the Kingdom with outsiders (not part of the 12 and maybe the 120 enter circle) was said in Parables. A Parable is a transliteration and not a well defined word, but has to do with having a parallel meaning and in the Bible you have a message (mostly common stories) with a parallel Spiritual meaning. We have only 3 spiritual meanings given to the 36+ parables Jesus, but those three can help us interpret the others.
You might need to understand: “why Jesus used parables.” There are lots of reasons:

1. If Jesus had given the crowd a very technical description of the Kingdom of God/heaven they would not understand what he was talking about since there was nothing they could relate to it. (A spiritual kingdom that has no boundaries [extends from individuals {Christians} all the way to God. An unseen Spiritual leader in/with each individual here on earth. A Kingdom made up of people from every nation and every race. A Kingdom without the need of an army, taxes, or servants, but a kingdom that serves its people).

2. The stories can be poetic and very entertaining, so they would enjoy listening to Christ and remember the stories.

3. Since they were about everyday people every story would be remembered by at least the people that lived those same experiences.

4. The people would unwittingly not only remember the stories, but retell the story to their family and friends, thus spreading the knowledge about the kingdom everywhere.

5. The Kingdom does come on Pentecost after Jesus rose and now the people could be part of that kingdom. As the people experienced the kingdom first hand they could remember what Jesus said and figure out the parallel message since they had the Kingdom itself to relate to it.

6. These parables are challenging, you need to think about the interpretation. Christ is not wanting to spoon feed us, but add value to our discovery through our effort.

7. Lastly if Jesus had spoken openly about the Kingdom his enemies could have used his explanations against Him, making it hard for Christ to spend the three years he needed to train the 12, before going to the cross.

[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']Parables for the non-believer are entertaining stories, but for the believer they describe the Kingdom He/she are now in.

[/FONT]

 

[Glass*Soul]

First off: Everything Jesus said about the Kingdom with outsiders (not part of the 12 and maybe the 120 enter circle) was said in Parables. A Parable is a transliteration and not a well defined word, but has to do with having a parallel meaning and in the Bible you have a message (mostly common stories) with a parallel Spiritual meaning. We have only 3 spiritual meanings given to the 36+ parables Jesus, but those three can help us interpret the others.
You might need to understand: “why Jesus used parables.” There are lots of reasons:

1. If Jesus had given the crowd a very technical description of the Kingdom of God/heaven they would not understand what he was talking about since there was nothing they could relate to it. (A spiritual kingdom that has no boundaries [extends from individuals {Christians} all the way to God. An unseen Spiritual leader in/with each individual here on earth. A Kingdom made up of people from every nation and every race. A Kingdom without the need of an army, taxes, or servants, but a kingdom that serves its people).

2. The stories can be poetic and very entertaining, so they would enjoy listening to Christ and remember the stories.

3. Since they were about everyday people every story would be remembered by at least the people that lived those same experiences.

4. The people would unwittingly not only remember the stories, but retell the story to their family and friends, thus spreading the knowledge about the kingdom everywhere.

5. The Kingdom does come on Pentecost after Jesus rose and now the people could be part of that kingdom. As the people experienced the kingdom first hand they could remember what Jesus said and figure out the parallel message since they had the Kingdom itself to relate to it.

6. These parables are challenging, you need to think about the interpretation. Christ is not wanting to spoon feed us, but add value to our discovery through our effort.

7. Lastly if Jesus had spoken openly about the Kingdom his enemies could have used his explanations against Him, making it hard for Christ to spend the three years he needed to train the 12, before going to the cross.

Parables for the non-believer are entertaining stories, but for the believer they describe the Kingdom He/she are now in.

Thanks. I find your list useful.

How would you apply your guidelines to this parable to answer the questions of who the king is and who he is throwing out of the wedding feast?

I would question using the word "transliteration" in your first guideline. I do not believe Jesus' parables use a straightforward symbol --> interpretation system that can be cracked with a key. For instance, a parable may allude to two related concepts using a single deft symbol or include two symbols for the same concept. The whole story may point to something that is best applied intuitively. Where a parable is explained, the explanation is flatter and less interesting than the parable itself. I do agree though that there are recurring motifs in Jesus' parables that allow us to enrich our experience of one parable by considering it beside another.

BTW, I might add another observation about parables. There is usually something in a good parable that feels...uncomfortable, that won't let it rest easy in your mind. It keeps you working on it in a subliminal manner. As long as you are working on it, it is working on you.

In this parable, the itchy-scratchy aspect of it is that the king strikes me as most resembling Herod Antipas, and I find evidence in the surrounding context that bolsters this impression. Yet, if you ask a group of Christians about it, almost to a person they will say the king resembles God.

Years ago, I started a topic on another parable in the theology section (which was allowed at the time) that features a person of power--the parable of the talents. I was beginning to think the landowner wasn't like God as Jesus was describing God in the bulk of his teachings. To my surprise, one person agreed with me. He thought it was Herod Archelaus. I about fell over. LOL. I did a little research on Herod Archelaus and I had to agree we probably had our man. The rest thought the wealthy landowner represented God.

This discrepancy in interpretation feels significant to me. If the same symbol in two parables strike most Christians as being like God and a few as being like the corrupt rulers of the day, this makes me uneasy in a way that keeps me coming back to them.