The Beast - Rome
7 heads - vassal nations under Roman rule
i.e both images refer to the Roman Empire.
John
NZ
7 heads - vassal nations under Roman rule
i.e both images refer to the Roman Empire.
John
NZ
Upvote
0
Is that a YES? Do you discard the Book of Revelation?Rev 16:13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
Rev 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all free and bond, both small and great.
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
Nice try, but ultimately unsuccessful. Not all of the parable have attached interpretations. You seem to be adding a lot of arbitrary rules to the definition of parable, can't use names, must have an interpretation.
Here's a good definition of parable: A simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson.
The parable of Lazarus and the Rich Guy fits this definition as well as any other parable.
A fox saw a bunch of grapes high on a vine. He jumped up to try to get them but they were too high to reach. The fox sniffed and said "I hate this parable."
The interpretation is: It's a parable when it serves your purpose, but when it doesn't, it isn't.
Nope! You just have to read it as the author intended it to be read.So you just discard Revelation?
some parables didn't have an interpretation, but in the verse that mentions "Jesus speaking in all parables" there IS an interpretation! Those seeking the truth would say "Explain to us the
parable..." - Mt 13:36 also where in this list is Lazerus or any name mentioned, you will find general terms like a farmer, a man, a woman, a peasant....etc... no names given in one parable
Pro 26:7 The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the mouth of fools.
How, then is it, that he did not speak to them about Lazarus without a parable?
Mr 4:34 And without a parable he did not speak to them: but to his own disciples, altogether privately, he solved all.
Mar 3:23 And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
Num 23:7 And he took up his parable, and said, Balak the king of Moab hath brought me from Aram, out of the mountains of the east, saying, Come, curse me Jacob, and come, defy Israel.
Job 27:1 Moreover Job continued his parable, and said,
Job 42:9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went, and did according as the LORD commanded them: the LORD also accepted Job.
Luk 20:19 And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
Mat 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.
Luk 18:9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: 10Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
Luk 12:41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
Who says it isn't?
I think I know whereof he speaks:are you saying you believe the resurrection and crucifiction was a parable?
The Parable Of The Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22:1-14) | Bible.org - Worlds Largest Bible Study Site1 Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying, 2"The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. 3 He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.
4 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.’
5 But they paid no attention and went off--one to his field, another to his business. 6 The rest seized his servants, mistreated them, and killed them. 7 The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.
8 Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. 9 Go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.’ 10 So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, both good and bad, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.
11 But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 12 ‘Friend,’ he asked, ‘how did you get in here without wedding clothes?’ The man was speechless. 13 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.’
14 "For many are invited, but few are chosen."
Observations on the Text
The meaning of this parable in the context of the Lord’s Passion Week, in which he was to be betrayed and crucified, is pretty clear--it condemns the contempt that Israel as a whole (and everyone in general) had (and has) for God’s gracious invitation through Jesus the Messiah.
The focus of the parable is on the wedding banquet of the Son. The reference is naturally to the Messianic banquet, which is not only mentioned in the New Testament (Rev. 19) but also in the Rabbinic Literature. At the end of the age, the Jewish tradition held, all the people of God--Israel--would enjoy a Messianic banquet in their transition from this life to the life to come. The details of that banquet, or the New Testament’s marriage supper of the Lamb, cannot be pressed too much since the circumstances are different, as we shall see.
We may also observe that the parable clearly intends to portray Israel’s spiritual indifference to the invitation in the sharpest way, culminating in their killing the messengers of the covenant. In Matthew 23 Jesus will accuse the hypocritical leaders of killing the prophets.
The imagery of a wedding banquet turns to the serious message when the man without the proper wedding clothes is not merely thrown out of the banquet, but is bound hand and foot, and cast into darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. This is obviously the judgment scene that Jesus repeated so often with these very words. Thus the banquet is the celebration of those who enter the kingdom, and the exclusion is the judgment of God for those who reject the invitation of grace.
Revelation is given to the church, so obviously it it meant for us to understand it.Nope! You just have to read it as the author intended it to be read.
Do you disregard the author's intention?
Sure sounds like it.are you saying you believe the resurrection and crucifiction was a parable?
Thank You good brother!I think I know whereof he speaks:
The Parable Of The Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22:1-14) | Bible.org - Worlds Largest Bible Study Site
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]In this world the slaves are forced to work for the free. In the Sovereignty of the Heavens the free shall act to serve the slaves: the Sons of the Bridal-Chamber shall serve the sons of marriage. The Sons of the Bridal-Chamber have [a single] name among them, the repose occurs among them mutually,[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]¹[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]they are made to have no needs. [...] [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif](Lk 20:34-36[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]![/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif], Ac 4:34-35, Ph 64; [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]¹[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]asyndeton; hyperlinear) ~ Philip [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I think the Philip comment integrates the parable with the Judaic tradition.--SG [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Thomas also records this parable of the Crucifixion: [/FONT]
(65) He said, "There was a good man who owned a vineyard. He leased it to tenant farmers so that they might work it and he might collect the produce from them. He sent his servant so that the tenants might give him the produce of the vineyard. They seized his servant and beat him, all but killing him. The servant went back and told his master. The master said, 'Perhaps he did not recognize them.' He sent another servant. The tenants beat this one as well. Then the owner sent his son and said, 'Perhaps they will show respect to my son.' Because the tenants knew that it was he who was the heir to the vineyard, they seized him and killed him. Let him who has ears hear.
so if Jesus spoke in parables to everyone, then how is the crucifixtion or the resurrection not parabalized!!!!
I just now saw this post.The Beast - Rome
7 heads - vassal nations under Roman rule
i.e both images refer to the Roman Empire.
John
NZ
Except that is not what He-man is saying. You asked :
To which we all replied that it is, and I gave examples. He-man thanked me for it, confirming the assumption to what he was trying to convey was correct.
From your statement, I too gathered that you did not believe the crucifixion to be mentioned in the Parables.
Carry on, I find this debate fascinating, please.
Yup; The "prophet" is identified as writing from Asia(?) around 90AD under the rule of Domitian. First official persecution of Christians, meaning that there was an actual law against Christianity. Military Empires have little use for men who refuse to fight. The "prophet" apparently saw no need to forgive his enemies, and wished a fiery destruction for them.I just now saw this post.
There was a polical situation happening when John wrote the apocalypse. Rome was a superpower, and was killing Christians. Knowing this affects how you read John's Apocalypse.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?