Hermeneutics: Interpreting Scripture

i think you are trying very hard to reject things like Matthew 13:10-15 in the nicest way you can imagine, but your imagination is not going to be big enough to make Jesus not say what He said.

we are going to have to choose between such imagination, and His words.
that's hermeneutic, friend: let scripture say what it says. it's the word of the infinite omniscient God - - no surprise that there are things in it which astound human comprehension.

Okay, I see that your comment pooh-poohs the Par. of the Tenants, but now I will present the next parable in Matthew, the Par. of the Weeds.

Jesus said that a man sowed wheat seeds in his field, but his enemy came while folks were sleeping and sowed weeds among the wheat. When it became apparent that the field was contaminated (or whatever the agrarian term is :^), the owner's servants asked whether they should pull up the weeds, and he told them to wait until the harvest, at which time the weeds should be burned and the wheat gathered into his barn.

Later in the privacy of a house Jesus explained the meaning of this parable, saying that the good seed was sown by the Son of Man, the field is the world, the good seed stands for those who belong to the kingdom, the weeds are those who belong to the evil one, the enemy who sowed the bad seed is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.

At the end of the age the Son of Man will send angels to weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and everyone who does evil and throw them into the blazing furnace where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, while the righteous will shine in the kingdom of their Father. Jesus concluded by saying, "Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear."

So, what do we learn from this passage that can help us to better understand the purpose of parables in the ministry of Jesus?

again, He only explained later, only in private, only to His disciples, demonstrating exactly what He explicitly said in the witness of scripture more than once: the purpose of the parables is to hide knowledge from some, and reveal it to others, according to His divine purpose.

does this fact not sit well with you?

thus indicating that some have ears to hear, and some do not.

If it does, start speaking in parables.

how does Elisha pray his servants eyes be opened, unless in their natural state they are not, and unless without prayer, they would not be?
why does Elisha pray his servants eyes be opened, unless it is the LORD, not the man, who opens the eye?

this is exactly congruent to the principle revealed by Christ having taught in parables.

This is a good point. I'm gonna use this. So much is assumed to be true of the fallen natural man that simply isn't biblical.

You imply that the purpose of God is to hide the Gospel from some so they will be damned to hell, but that does NOT "sit well" with MT 5:44&48, in which Jesus indicates that God loves everyone, including His enemies, so perhaps we should not be too hasty in our interpretation, because it may be that Jesus wants everyone with ears to hear, but it is the devil who causes the truth to be hidden or corrupted.

Do you want to present another parable?

No, hermeneutics is harmonization of everything that GW says, and you will notice that in MT 13:10-15 Jesus did NOT say that he prevents people from becoming his disciples, NOR that he causes people's hearts to be calloused, so let us be careful not to project our own hatred onto the all-loving Christ, who was expressing lament by citing IS 6:9-10 as he did over Jerusalem in MT 23:37.

Actually, you are implying that the servant's eyes were opened because of Elisha's love rather than God's, who could open everyone's eyes, which is a problematic interpretation.

i am implying nothing other than these two facts which are made clear by Elisha's prayer:
some people's eyes are blind, and God is able to open them or close them. that has direct relevance to the topic of His use of parable.

but if you find a fault in your own interpretation, then you should examine whether what you consider fault is truly fault, and whether what you believe to be implied is truly implied.

the fault is never in the scripture. it is always in our minds.

you will notice i didn't say what you said here. this came from your own mind - but how?

i said what Christ said: He taught in parables, instead of plainly, in order to prevent some from being able to see, hear and, understand - while simultaneously adding understanding to others. the parables selectively add and remove knowledge from those who hear or read them, by the Will of Him Who breathed them.

we should read it, and not deny it:

why does God say make their ears dull, but GWH says God would never say that?
why does God say shut their eyes, but GWH says God would never do that?

Jesus in Mark 4 and Matthew 13 is quoting Himself. yes, there is an element of sorrow here - who imagines God takes pleasure in the death of the wicked?
but there is not what someone chooses to call 'irony' - He is not saying something He does not mean. He is not instructing Isaiah to do the opposite of what He intends Isaiah to do. He is not lying.

He is telling Isaiah He will do exactly what He explained He did by teaching in parables: He will selectively make one eye blind, and one that sees. He will open the ear of one, and shut the ear of the other. to one He will reveal knowledge, and to another He will hide it.

the irony present is that those who said they see, did not, and those that said they do not hear, heard.

we may draw conclusions from this, but we cannot pretend it does not say what it says.

note the presence of the theme of salvation here: by the touching of the lips with the coal of the altar, Isaiah's sin was purged, and his iniquity removed from him. note this had nothing to do with any action the prophet took, but what was done to him by the seraphim.
this also cannot be removed from the passage.

God's own words, not mine:

what do you think this means?

He said this is the explicit reason He taught in parables, in order that this might be fulfilled.

please give a direct answer.

God veils things so that only the spiritually discerning can hear them. Do you remember the tale of Babel when God confused the tongues? Same thing

perfectly appropos proverb, thanks!
it is not the dishonor of God to conceal a thing, but in fact, His glory

just He hid Himself in flesh, and only some realized He was God dwelling among His people - - He did not come in His first advent in glory, but set it aside, and came in meekness, and it is perfect that He did so.

That was exactly my point, so I am glad we agree! :^)
Then to be consistent you think Jesus should have rejoiced rather than lamented that Jerusalem was unwilling?!

Okay, would you like to present the next parable for our edification? (In the NIV the next three in MT 13:44-52 are short and presented as sort of a trilogy on the same theme :^)

What would you like me to do or explain? I see the parables, but I don't see what you want me to do with them

to be consistent you must accept both that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked and that He hardens hearts and hides knowledge from people; that salvation is by mercy only, to whom He will show it, and that sovereign election exists, about which mankind is exceedingly vain to think to complain against Him.

none of which means He does not love all nor that humankind has no free agency.


in my opinion your theology in our conversation has been too narrow, not allowing for the mystery and primacy of His will. because i intentionally focused on what i perceived you were neglecting, you presumed me from the beginning to fit into the narrow box of the extreme opposite of your narrow box. that is not the case. harmonization of scripture, in my view, does not allow us to camp ourselves in either Pelagianism nor Augustianism, nor to completely deny either.

the western church has a long history of thinking it can explain the profound, and in doing so ignoring alternate halves of the Bible. we have something to learn from our sister the East, which accepts that mystery exists, and simply embraces it as what it is: profundity.

that is hermeneutic.
let scripture say what it says, and when you cannot fathom it, don't deny it: humble yourself. it speaks of things too wonderful for you, and you should have every expectation that it does so.
it is after all, the word of omniscient, infinite God, as much higher than us as the utmost heavens are higher than the bottom of the sea.