Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
All true, but it still doesn't prove your hypothesis that christians are both the bride and guest of the bride at the same time.
Blind Guides and Deluded Followers
- Thread starter Keraz
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I can't make any sense of what you're saying.
What time period do you think Matthew 22:1-14 covers?
Keeping in mind that this is a parable and not describing an actual invitation to an actual wedding, what do you think the invitation to the wedding represents? Who does the king in the parable represent? Who does the king's son represent? Who are the king's servants? Who are the ones who rejected the invitation and who killed the king's servants? What do "the highways" represent where the wedding invitation is taken after the people who were first invited rejected it? Who are the guests that show up to the wedding with wedding garments on?
It is foolish to not recognize the wedding guests who have their wedding clothes on as all being part of the bride of Christ. Who else are they? Do you not understand that this is a parable and the invitation to the wedding represents the offer of salvation to people? The ones who fully accept it are Christians. Are Christians who accept the gospel offer not part of the bride of Christ?
LOL. How could he be there if he wasn't an invited guest? Put aside your doctrinal bias so that you don't end up drawing ridiculous conclusions like this. All people were invited, so all were guests. Look at what Jesus said to sum up the parable:
Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
Many (a multitude) were invited to be guests at the wedding, but not all accepted the invitation. Anyone who actually showed up would be considered an invited guest. But, any invited guest who didn't have their wedding clothes on would be cast into outer darkness. To deny that the person without his wedding clothes on is a guest is ludicrous.
That's a false accusation. Is that all you have to offer?
And many disagree with you. So?
Are you referring to Matthew 22:1-14? That is a parable! Spiritual discernment is required to determine what Jesus was talking about there. Not "normal understanding".
This is completely out of line. You should be ashamed of yourself. I interpret things spiritually when they are written that way and literally when they are written that way. Don't act as if I spiritualize all scripture. You are purposely falsely misrepresenting my approach to scripture. I'm saying we need spiritual discernment to determine what is literal and what isn't. Obviously, not all scripture is spiritual or figurative and not all scripture is literal.
It also means using insight from the Holy Spirit to determine what is literal and what is spiritual or what is symbolic. But, you act as if everything written in scripture is literal. Clearly, that is not the case. Jesus's parables are not meant to be taken literally. They are made up stories that figuratively represent certain things in reality.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
The highways represent the gentile peoples.
this is the time when Jesus returns and sets up His Millenial kingdom.
The wedding takes place in heaven. before Jesus returns to earth.
When He returns He must do several things and once the kingdom is established the
wedding supper takes place! Can I explain all the mechanics and whats and wherefores? NO! but that is when it takes place.
Rev. 19:
6 And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.
7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
Yet it is you who has redefined a bride to mean a guest and then say it is "spiritual discernment". Jesus is not a trickster who hides the meaning of His Words to HIs followers and only the "spiritually adept" can understand what He really meant.
So you are saying it took "spiritual discernment" to know that the bride is also the guests with the wedding garments in contradiction to all norms of language and conversation and word meanings?
But yet there are legions of people who call themselves believers who believe Jesus really didn't physically rise from the dead but only spiritually rose from the dead. They also use the same excuse as you in saying it takes "spiritual discernment". But you say their "discernment" is wrong! And no parable redefined commonly used words to make them mean something totally different like guest=bride.
Not at all! It simply takes looking at the passage to know if Jesus was speaking a parable.
Matthew 22
King James Version
22 And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said,2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
6 And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
8 Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.
See verse 22? that lets me know Jesus is making a parable because He is making a comparison.
Just like we know the account of Lazarus and the rich man is a true account because Jesus said:
Luke 16:20-26
King James Version
20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
Jesus said "there was" so there was! It is that simple.
I stand amazed at how so many believers when they get some time following Jesus under their belts become more and more uneducated. Jesus created grammar and the rules of grammar so we could communicate and understand each other.
I follow what is called the "literal/historical/grammatical hermeneutic, for after 50 years I find it does the least harm to the Scriptures.
“When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.”–Dr. David L. Cooper (1886-1965),
founder of The Biblical Research Society
If we practiced this, we would have less "spiritually discerned" passages that contradict dozens of others who "spiritually discerned" something else for the same passage!
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
Goodness gracious sakes. You couldn't be more off base if you tried. Where in the parable did Jesus indicate such a thing?
Let me clue you in on something. The gospel started going out to the Gentiles long ago already. The parable is about how the Jews were the first to have the gospel preached to them before they rejected it and it then went to the Gentiles. How can you not recognize this? It's unbelievable.
The unbelieving Jews paid a severe price for that as the parable indicates:
Matthew 22:5 “But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his business; 6 the rest took his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. 7 When the king heard about it, he was angry. He sent in his army and destroyed those murderers and burned up their city.
What happened to the Jews who rejected Christ long ago? They were destroyed along with their city in 70 AD. That is what this parable is referring to. The wedding invitation going to the highways is a reference to the gospel going to the Gentiles after the Jews rejected it (not all of them, but most):
Acts 13:44 On the next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord. 45 When the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy. They began to contradict what Paul was saying and heaped abuse on him. 46 Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles. 47 For this is what the Lord has commanded us: ‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’
No, it does not. That's a fairy tale.
Scripture does not teach that. And you certainly are doing nothing to convincingly back that claim up.
What is your point in quoting this passage? Do you not believe that the souls of believers are in heaven right now? It's not referring there to anyone in heaven who had already been changed to have an immortal body.
It is you who is acting as if a parable is a true story. No wonder you are so confused. You can't tell the difference between parables and reality or between symbolic text and reality.
To be clear, I am not saying at all that Jesus never spoke straightforwardly. Most of the time when He wasn't speaking in parables, He did. But, certainly you need spiritual discernment to understand any of His parable that He did not fully explain. Such as Matthew 22:1-14. But, I am not only referring to what Jesus said, but to what Paul and the other authors of the Bible wrote. It requires spiritual discernment at times to understand what they wrote. Especially Paul, I would say. That's why Peter said this about Paul's writings:
2 Peter 3:15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Even Peter thought that Paul's letters "contain some things that are hard to understand". But, you seem to think that anyone can understand what he wrote with no need for spiritual discernment. Despite Paul himself indicating that "the natural man" cannot understand what he taught as it relates to the deeper things of God (1 Cor 2:9-16).
So, can you humble yourself like Peter and acknowledge that some things Paul wrote are hard to understand and require help from the Holy Spirit to spiritually discern what he wrote?
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
Yes, of course. We know the bride of Christ is not just one person, right? So, why do you want to make the wedding of Christ with His bride to be exactly like a normal wedding? It clearly is not since the bride of Christ is not just one person. So, there is no basis for looking at it the way you do.
That has absolutely nothing to do with me whatsoever. So, don't go there.
Are you trying to tell me that spiritual discernment is never required to interpret scripture? If so, what do you make of 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 then? What do you make of even Peter saying that some of Paul's writings are hard to understand?
Are we not redefining a bride to consist of many more than just one person even though a bride is normally just one person? What is your hang up about not taking a PARABLE literally as if it was a true story? It's ridiculous. Are you aware that parables are not true stories? I'm starting to wonder. Yes, they represent things that are true, but parables themselves are made up stories used to represent things in reality. You don't seem to understand that when it comes to Matthew 22:1-14.
Honestly, I'm a bit surprised that you do recognize that it's a parable. So, why the insistence that this made up story has to be just like reality? It clearly isn't since the bride is not just one person like a normal wedding. There is no reason to treat a made up wedding scenario like we see in this parable as if it's talking about a normal wedding when it so obviously is not. Think about it.
That's what occurs to me when I see your false beliefs. I'm thinking your beliefs probably just became more and more false over time.
LOL! Are you serious? Was the Bible written in English? Did Jesus speak in English? No and no. Where does the Bible itself teach that we should interpret it based on English grammar rules? Nowhere. Where does it teach that we sometimes can only understand it with the help of the Holy Spirit? In 1 Corinthians 2:9-16. Don't make up your own faulty rules, go by the rules taught in scripture itself.
That's a terrible hermeneutic, as evidenced by your many false interpretations. Frankly, your interpretation of Matthew 22:1-14 is embarrassing. Just unbelievable. I can't believe anyone could interpret it that way without recognizing that it's about how the gospel first went out to the Jews in Israel before going out to the Gentiles.
Such nonsense. And not supported by scripture itself. Who decides when "the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise" and how is that decided? Does that not require spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit? Of course it does. But, you say no spiritual discernment is required. Utter nonsense.
Stumpmaster
Well-Known Member
I don't recall positing the above.
The Parable of the Wedding Guests is about the sending and accepting of invitations, and the wearing of appropriate garments.
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
Do you think there is currently segregation and two types of humans living in Paradise, or are they all still in sheol?
Most think that naked souls are now in heaven, when once they were naked souls in sheol. Not sure how you can distinguish metaphor with naked souls, but you all seem dead set on keeping people dead even in heaven.
Having a physical body may help distinguish between Israel, and Egyptian, or between Roman and Greek people unless every one looks like a 30 year old male, and there are not any females at all. Or unless all look like 30 year old brides, all female, and Jesus is the only male. How far do you take your metaphor into reality? If they are only souls without a physical body, why would it even matter what soul was what, as a soul would not have physical characteristics, as that is what a body is for.
To you there must be a section of souls from the OT, and then across some divide, the souls from the NT?
Some just see all souls without any physical characteristics at all, still waiting that physical resurrection. So the wedding metaphor only works on those on earth, still in a physical body.
Obviously many in Paradise are currently shaking their physical heads, on their physical bodies, wondering why you all on earth think they don't even have physical bodies.
Can you imagine if God allowed an internet connection in Paradise, the arguments going on between those in heaven with those on earth?
From heaven: we have physical bodies.
From earth: no you don't.
From heaven: yes we do.
From earth: nope, it says in Scripture, you can't.
From heaven: it says in Scripture we do.
From earth: prove it.
So calling them metaphors after they are already in Paradise, and especially if they don't even have a physical body, how do those metaphors even work?
Last edited:
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Do you really believe this? The gospel had not even started being preached yet when Jesus taught this parable! Never mind to the Jews yet.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
So you think that gives you license to change the definition of terms? NOT!
But they do the same as you- redefine words to support their personal agendas.
To interpret Scripture? NO! To believe Scripture? YES! We are never called to interpret Scripture as Peter said. We are to accept and obey! Teh reason Paul's word were hard to understand because He taught things unheard of before in any circles. He was the apostle to the gentiles. He did not teach the law nor the worship of idols and the resurrection was a huge deal in the gentile world as being foolish to most. Plus elevation of women, salvation apart from any works, etc.etc.
2 Peter 1:20
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
Once again many others "spiritually discern" the Scriptures and disagree with you and use the same arguments you do. So who is listening to the spirit and who is not?
Because the parables compare spiritual realities to earthly realities! Even Jesus said that.
Well the Pharisees were embarrassed by many followers of Jesus as well. Many false interpretations? I have no false interpretations. I accept teh Scriptures as written, while you on the other hand have shown that you follow that old maxim: " I know what the bible says, but this is what it means". You are just like so many others who privately interpret the Scripture.
This is why I am a little amazed you still accept teh physical resurrection of Jesus.
Well it is not first and foremost about how the gospel went out (though that is also what is meant when the parable talks about going to teh highways and byways which you said was wrong earlier)
No it requires knowing how language is used! Let me give you an example:
Revelation 13
King James Version
13 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.Now we know that while this is still something possible with God, based on all man knows this is highly improbable. so taking it strictly literal is the wrong option.
But by searching other passages using the same non-literal descriptions we learn that this is the antichrist.
We did not have to "discern" what God in secret was trying to say. We just had to search the Scriptures to learn that God spoke much about this person and what all parts of this beast represent.
You also need to learn that when Paul spoke of spiritually discerned in Corinth (anakrino) it is not the same as the modern term of discerning. It is not trying to figure out what is being said but to examine and judge the term.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
That was not written to you. If I posted it to you I apologize. It was meant for spiritual israelite.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Paradise was taken to heaven when Jesus ascended so it is no longer in sheol. I assume they are clothed, but that is my assumption.
I freely admit, I don't know the mechanics of the church marrying Jesus, just that we will.
Not in Sheol. All ot saints are in heaven now and when a believer dies we go straight to heaven. These differences are in reference to the millenial kingdom only.
Well as you made the metaphors, I can't say how your metaphors work.
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
The metaphor of the wedding?
You said it takes place in heaven. Do they not have physical bodies in a metaphor?
Some would say the bride was Israel. Some would say the groom is the body of Christ. Those invited to the wedding would be those not of the church, nor Israel.
Seems anyone can say whatever they want. Perhaps there is not a marriage in heaven, but the parable is about the millennium, and the church is not on earth at all, but represented by the groom. Only the groom is on the earth, representing the church in Paradise. Israel is now the kingdom in relationship to a wife. The invited guests are all other nations allowed into the Millennium, unless of course they do not belong, ie without the proper garments.
Some claim the parable is the advent of the NT church on earth. But there is no physical kingdom on the earth that Jesus would be physically overseeing during the past 2 millennia. This is not about a heavenly kingdom, why would unsaved people suddenly show up in heaven, only to be cast out a few days later, or years later? This is a kingdom that is of heaven, but physically on earth, as this would be an earthly relationship with God and those on the earth via the person of Jesus on the earth.
Even Calvanism could claim some have snuck into the church who were never elect, thus needed to be cast out of the church, but then again, the kingdom is not on earth for the church, but in heaven. If this is taking place as a kingdom on earth, the only earthly kingdom, is Jesus' promised relationship with Israel on earth as their physical recognizable Prince to come. Jesus came as their Messiah, when they were looking for a Prince. Now Jesus is coming as a Prince while they are still looking for their Messiah. Israel will only recognize their Messiah and Prince, when Jesus shows the wounds in His body from the Cross.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
I care less what some say. I care what the bible says and it explicitly says the bride is the church and the groom Jesus.
All this is just more human speculation meant to seek to muddy the clear teaching of Scripture.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I didn't say otherwise. Where are you getting that from? I believe He was talking about what was going to happen in the near future from that time. The gospel was first going to be preached in Israel and then to the Gentiles nations.
Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
When the parable talks about the ones who were initially invited to the wedding it's talking about the Jews being the first to hear the gospel. When it talks about His servants being mistreated and killed it's talking about His disciples. When it talks about the invitation then going out into the highways it's talking about when the gospel went out into the Gentile nations.
Acts 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. 45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming. 46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
It really couldn't be any more obvious that in the parable (Matthew 22:1-14) Jesus was talking about how the gospel would first be preached in Israel, would be mostly rejected by the Jews and then would go to the Gentiles.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
LOL! I have license to interpret the parable as it was intended to be interpreted. I'm not changing anything. You say guests can only mean one thing. Imagine if someone said a bride can only refer to one person and not many since that is how things normally are? But, you want to insist on taking a parable literally as if it was a real story instead of a made up story to illustrate a point about reality.
So, I take it you have never read 1 Corinthians 2:9-16? Because you are contradicting what Paul wrote there. Peter never said we are never called to interpret scripture. That is nonsense.
Oh, so even though even Peter himself found Paul's words to be difficult to understand (difficult, but not impossible and he indicated people were still expected to understand), you think they are easy. You think yourself to have better discernment than even Peter had. Get over yourself already.
This is not talking about believers interpreting the prophecies. This illustrates the reason you miss so much. You often don't look for the context of scripture. If you look at the surrounding verses you can see the context of that verse.
2 Peter 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Verse 21 gives the context of verse 20. What Peter is saying here is that prophecy did not come about by the will of man (private interpretation), but rather came from the Holy Spirit as revealed to God's prophets. It's not talking about you or me having our own interpretations of prophecy.
With that said, it's true that someone having their own interpretation of a prophecy raises a red flag. Surely, God does not reveal the meaning of a prophecy to just one person. I don't have any interpretations all to myself like some on here do. It seems like you are trying to accuse me of that, but that would be baseless. There are plenty of people who agree with me in my interpretation of Matthew 22:1-14. Far more than agree with your interpretation.
You certainly interpret Matthew 22:1-14 falsely. You are too prideful and stubborn to admit it.
Are parables supposed to be accepted "as written" even though they are made up stories to illustrate truths in reality? Of course not. So, it makes no sense to apply that approach to parables or to prophecies that contain a lot of symbolism and so on.
Nonsense! You shouldn't be amazed at all. I interpret parables as parables (made up stories reflecting things in reality) and not as true stories. I interpret literal text as literal. I interpret metaphors as metaphors. Poems as poems. Hyperbole as hyperbole. Symbolism as symbolism. You, however, ridiculously want to interpret everything literally.
I have no idea what you were attempting to say here. Can you tell me again what your understanding is of the parable in Matthew 22:1-14? It seems like you're not sure. It can't be both about the gospel going out and about something supposedly happening during a future millennium. There is no indication of such whatsoever in the parable. So, which is it?
He very clearly indicated that the spiritual discernment he talks about in 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 comes from the Holy Spirit. You, on the other hand, seem to think you can take your limited human brain and figure everything out on your own even without the Holy Spirit revealing the meaning of what you're reading to you.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
I agree with this. the only thing that is wrong is your idea that teh church is both the bride and the wedding guests.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
And how do you know your interpretation is ahow Jesus intended it? Were you there?
No I have read it and taught it many times. but that verse says nothing about taking a verse and finding new and different meanings for what is written. That is called misinterpreting the Bible.
So these men were moved by god to write down what they did, but you have liberty to interpret it any way you see fit? Nothanks! I want no part of that. that is cultic and occultic behavior
So now you know the inner workings of my heart and soul as well now? WOW!!!!! Because I dare disagree with you that the term bride and guest are not interchangeable as is the accepted norm world wide?
Yes they are! they are parables and take something physical to compare it to something spiritual. so th ekingdom of heaven IS like a man who sowed seeds, bought a pearl etc.etc. YOu look at the physical to gain an insight into the spiritual. It needs no interpreting but simple understanding!
Not in teh least. I can take my limited brain which has been illuminated and reborn by the Spirit and understand the things Paul wrote. Because you tend to live in the mystical and ephemeral, you fail to see that what the epistles are. they were radical concepts foreign to nearly all people and it took the spirit to be able to understand teh concepts being taught! It is not some thing like you and dozens of otrher failed cult leaders have tried to promote, which is this phrase in a nutshell: " I know what the bible says, but this is what it means".
YOu seek to redefine Scripture so you can have power over people. YOu have the "real meaning" of what is written and people need to come to yo to know what is really written. I have seen literally hundreds of people like you come and go.
.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
What exactly do you agree with that I said then? I am saying that Matthew 22:1-14 represents the gospel going out into the whole world starting in Israel. Agree? So, it's about God's offer of salvation to people throughout the world. That's what the wedding invite represents. The ones who accept the invite are the guests who arrive at the wedding. Agree?
Since we're talking about the gospel call to salvation here, then the guests who accept the invitation are those who accept the gospel. Agree? But, Jesus differentiated between guests with wedding clothes on and guests without wedding clothes on. A guest that Jesus saw without wedding clothes on was cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. So, that is someone who did not reject the wedding invitation but didn't fully accept it, either. Which means, in reality, it's a person who didn't reject the gospel but didn't fully accept it, either. That's not what God is looking for from people. He wants people who fully accept the gospel and surrender their lives to Him. So, the wedding guests who have wedding clothes on and are not cast into outer darkness represent people who fully accept and embrace the gospel of Jesus Christ. Is that not the people who make up the bride of Christ? Of course it is!
So, in this parable, unlike in reality (parables aren't real stories, they are made up stories to illustrate real things), the wedding guests are also the bride. But, only the ones with their wedding clothes on. Because they are the ones who accept Christ, are Christians and are part of His bride.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I know what I know. Whether you agree or not doesn't change that. My interpretation fits with other scripture that talks about an offer (the gospel offer) that first went out to certain people (the Jews) before later going out to other people (the Gentiles). To me, it is very obvious as to what the parable is about and what it means.
I never said it means that. It's always a desperate measure when someone resorts to misrepresenting what the other person believes.
What it does mean is that when it comes to the deeper things in scripture like what we talk about on this forum, we need spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit to understand those scriptures. Similar to how Jesus opened the spiritual eyes of the disciples so that they could understand the OT scriptures that were about Him.
When did I say this? Again, you are resorting to misrepresenting my view. What in the world is this nonsense about interpreting it any way I see fit? Are you kidding me? If I don't take Jesus's parables literally as if they are true stories am I interpreting them the way I see fit? If I see symbolism in Revelation am I interpreting it any way I see fit? Of course not. Is everything in the Bible literal? No, of course not! So, what are you even talking about? All of us need to determine which text is literal, which is poetic, which is spiritual, which is symbolic, which is hyperbole, which is Apocalyptic and so on. Why do you act as if the entire Bible is written in literal text when you know full well that it is not?
You make it quite obvious, so I'm not claiming that I did anything special here. If you can't determine what a parable like Matthew 22:1-14 is about even after it has been explained to you, then what does that say about you? It's a very easy parable to discern. Jesus summed it up in Matthew 22:14 by saying "Many are called, but few are chosen". If you know what He meant by that then you know what the parable is about. So, what are many called to, but relatively few chosen to? Salvation, right? What else? So, that is what the parable is all about. The gospel call/invite to salvation.
Are you purposely trying to misunderstand what I'm saying? I did not say that parables do not "take something physical to compare it to something spiritual". I simply said they are not true stories and are made up stories to illustrate things that are real, including real spiritual things. You say a parable "needs no interpreting but simple understanding", yet you don't even understand a simple parable like Matthew 22:1-14.
Okay, so you're relying on the Holy Spirit for understanding then, right? That is my point. Goodness sakes...
False made up claim. Don't waste my time with nonsense like this.
You are way out of line here and need to repent. You are calling me a cult leader. Cult leaders are not Christians. So, you are judging me. Jesus said not to do that (Matthew 7:1-2). Listen to Him and repent of this. Otherwise, you will be judged by the same measure you are judging me and that won't be good for you.
That is a lie. Do you think you help your cause by making up lies like this? If my interpretation is wrong, it's not because I'm trying to redefine scripture. You are unable to back up your beliefs with scripture, so you resort to personal insults like this instead. Is this all you have to offer?
I've never said this. That's another lie. I encourage people to study the scriptures for themselves like the Bereans did (Acts 17:10-11), not to come to me to know what is really written. You continue to make things up and make yourself look bad in the process.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
The wedding guests are those saints outside of the church who are saved but not part of the church. This would be all saints who died before Pentecost and all saints who got saved after teh rapture. They are the guests of teh Father to teh wedding feast of Jesus and his bride the church.
7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
22 And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said,
2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
6 And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
8 Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.
9 Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
10 So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
The marriage takes place in heaven and the wedding feast takes place on earth after Jesus returns.
John 3:29
He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.
John knew He was not pat of teh bride.
Similar threads
