The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

This is the place to discuss anything to do with scriptural doctrine. It is the primary purpose of this site, and most discussions will be here.
Forum rules
Matt 18:6; Eccl 7:9; 1 Pet 4:8 (If you're not sure what they say then please hover over them with your mouse or look them up in your own Bible before posting)
Message
Author
Get out of her
Posts: 1227
Joined: 5 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#21 Post by Get out of her » 5 years ago

Greetings Jo-el and thank you for the warm welcome;

I tried to post a message yesterday but somehow it got zapped into cyberspace. I'm sure it has to do with my lack of familiarity with this particular website. Hopefully I do better this time.

Just a few thoughts on this topic of Mt 13:33;

This is one of many scriptures that I ended up doing much meditation and prayer on over the years. I'm happy to see that I was not the only one that found it rather intriguing and worthy of closer examination.
I also have to confess that in my estimation, not only had I never read or heard an explanation that made sense to me, but the one I recall from the organization even seemed to contradict other scriptures.
(Ro 12:1) (Ac 17:11)

Anyhow the end result was that a total of three possible explanations eventually occurred to me before I finally settled on one that seems to continue to stand up to any and all scriptural scrutiny.
The second Idea that came to my mind actually was the exact same one that "Cocus Illicis"? (If I am rendering that correctly) came up with.

I would love to share exactly where I ended up on this particular subject and most importantly the scriptures and lines of reasonings that led me there if anyone is interested.

jo-el
Posts: 1126
Joined: 8 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#22 Post by jo-el » 5 years ago

Get out of her wrote:The second Idea that came to my mind actually was the exact same one that "Cocus Illicis"? (If I am rendering that correctly) came up with.

I would love to share exactly where I ended up on this particular subject and most importantly the scriptures and lines of reasonings that led me there if anyone is interested.
Yes of course, always interested in others insights!

Orchid61
Posts: 709
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#23 Post by Orchid61 » 5 years ago

Hi,

Just a thought:

Leaven causing the dough to expand. Three lumps of dough. Three keys used by Peter.
Preaching the Kingdom to
1. Jews, those who believed became Christians.
2. Samaritans, those who believed became Christians
3. Heathens, those who believed became Christians.

Love to all,
Willy the counterpart of William
:waving:

Orchid61
Posts: 709
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#24 Post by Orchid61 » 5 years ago

This Jewish man turns to Jesus and explains so beautiful why he does.
Enjoy watching.

https://youtu.be/5sMEkGoojbg

:waving:

apollos0fAlexandria
Posts: 3458
Joined: 8 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#25 Post by apollos0fAlexandria » 5 years ago

Orchid61 wrote:This Jewish man turns to Jesus and explains so beautiful why he does.
Enjoy watching.

https://youtu.be/5sMEkGoojbg

:waving:
That was very neat to hear. Thanks for posting.

AmosAU
Posts: 1463
Joined: 8 years ago
Location: Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#26 Post by AmosAU » 5 years ago

Orchid61 wrote:This Jewish man turns to Jesus and explains so beautiful why he does.
Enjoy watching.

https://youtu.be/5sMEkGoojbg

:waving:
Hi Willy,

This is such an excellent testimony. It should make many of us sit up & take notice of what we believe or not believe. This Jewish man & his father are an example for us to take notice of. How many Christian believers actually appreciate the truths contained in the bible? How many of us don't really do a meaningful study of scripture? Many of us are "born into a religion or cult" & are just another number, without any meaning in their life.

I hope all our members view this video.

Regards, Amos.

Get out of her
Posts: 1227
Joined: 5 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#27 Post by Get out of her » 5 years ago

Hello Jo-el, nice to hear back from you.

I unfortunately just had another posting zapped into cyberspace so i'm afraid I will have to try again tomorrow.

It looks like the mistake I keep making is clicking on PREVIEW before either SAVE DRAFT or SUBMIT. Twice now I went straight to the Submit button and had no problem so that was my first clue as they say.

Do you happen to know if I am gonna have a problem by hitting SAVE DRAFT?

Phoebe
Posts: 970
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#28 Post by Phoebe » 5 years ago

I loved this link, thank you.
So simple.
I love the way he was draw in by the opening genealogy, and then was drawn by Christ's spirit, his 'voice'.
As a dear atheist family member once said to me "well, to be fair, you'd have to be a right ba$ta@d not to warm to the 'person' of Jesus"

Orchid61
Posts: 709
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#29 Post by Orchid61 » 5 years ago

Good morning, well it is in my part of the world ;)

Apollos, Amos and Phoebe thank you for watching :D

I was drawn to the sincere enthusiasme of this Jewish man(and his father) to have found Jesus. It resembled my feelings when I awoke after the 40 years asleep within the Org.
They teach you to take Jesus for granted and it's a crying out loud shame they do.

If they only could show this video on their CLAM-meeting.

Love to all,
Willy the female counterpart of William

User avatar
coccus ilicis
Posts: 1027
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: The Kingdom of the Heavens is like Leaven Mt13:33

#30 Post by coccus ilicis » 5 years ago

jo-el wrote: In Islam, Jesus is in 2nd place as evident in the word "penultimate" and He is placed as a prophet ONLY.
In Islam ALL prophets are considered equal - yes, but some are "more equal than others".
In Islam Muhammed is called the "Seal of the Prophets" - he is the LAST. This theology attempts to take away that Jesus fulfilled the scriptures -i.e. "in the volume of the book".
In Islam, Muhammed has the greater mission, Jesus is sent ONLY to the Jews, but Muhammed carries the message for all mankind. This means that Jesus is not Gods light to the Gentiles in fulfillment of prophecy - that role is now assumed by Muhammed.
Islam does not call upon the name of Jesus which means YHWH Saves.
Islam does not believe that Jesus is the Son of God.
Islam does not practise baptism or the Lords supper.
Islam believes that the Quran is the only uncorrupted Revelation from God - the message of Moses and the Christian gospels are considered "tainted"
Islam apologetics teach that Jesus is ONLY Gods servant.
Islam believes that Jesus will return - but not as the Almighty's appointed King, rather to assist the Muslim war against anti-Christ, after which Jesus will live a short time and die.
In Islam Jesus is very literally "just a man".

SO while Islam does indeed acknowledge Jesus as a prophet to a great degree, that is the extent of it and many of their beliefs about Jesus childhood for example are drawn from the likes of Gnostic texts rejected by orthodox Christianity. Therefore, when Islam uses the term Messiah, it is only in the sense of anointed one and not in terms of salvation
Hello jo_el

Thank you for your reply, you have given this a lot thought and using Christendom’s teaching as your benchmark your list of what Islam does and doesn’t believe about Jesus is quite extensive. I wonder though what kind of litany of errors a Muslim would list using Islam and the Quran as a benchmark. I seem to remember hearing that one reason they do not approve of translating the Quran is that translations cannot accurately render the message of the original and they say the same about the Bible which is quoted in the Quran. And of course it is quite true that translation does distort.

It must also be remembered that what Paul wrote Timothy with regard to 'the writings' Timothy had learnt from infancy could not have included NT writings since Timothy’s infancy would have been in the 30s shortly after Jesus died (2Tim 3:14, 15). But that does not mean that the NT is not inspired but simply that Paul was not talking about the Bible as we have it today when he said, … all writing is inspired of God… (2Tim 3:16) and those writings he had in mind would have included some manuscripts that today are thought of as apocrypha.

But this thread is not about attempting to yank the straw from Judaism’s Christendom’s or Islam’s eye, which is a form of one upmanship - we have God’s blessings you don’t. Epithets - goy, worldly, infidels, heretics, heathens and others such as these have been man’s excuse for subjugating and plundering fellow man from the year dot. But this thread is about what constitutes the leaven that ferments the flour, and coming to terms with sin – our sin - missing the mark and failing to face up to how we personally contribute and perpetuate this error that originated with Adam. The path they chose was a deviation from the narrow path that leads to life, and that is the literal meaning of sin, to miss ( H2398) When Cain became jealous of his brother he like his parents had a choice, if he backed off from his self righteous indignation, and he did a good deed an inner change would occur that would lift up his spirit. But if he did not, sin, the deviation off the narrow path would gain mastery over him (Gen 4:6,7). Emulating his parents he let the desire of his heart (in his case anger) rule. His righteous indignation would not have been insurmountable, his heavenly father had told him what he needed to do to gain mastery of it – do the exact opposite from what he wanted to do.

When Adam and Eve were created they were a blank page; they had no other humans from whom to learn conduct befitting humans, God their father was their tutor and mentor teaching them the norms befitting sons of God. He gave them authority over the earth telling them to … fill the earth and subdue it (Gem 1:28) and to have all living things in subjection, but note this did not include fellow humans, each person would be a son or daughter of God and their father would teach them behaviour and thought patterns necessary for someone granted god-like authority. Jesus referred to this when he said … ”You heard that it is said, ‘You must love your neighbour and hate you enemy.’ However I say to you: Continue to love your enemies and pray for those persecuting you; that you may prove yourselves sons of your father who is in the heavens… for if you love those loving you, what reward to you have?... And if you greet your brothers only, what extraordinary (superior) thing are you doing, Are not also the people of the nations doing the same thing? You must accordingly be perfect (complete, mature) as your heavenly father is perfect… Matt 5:43, 49 Jesus had come to re-introduced God’s standard of conduct that Adam and Eve and Cain had rejected.

In time Cain proceeded to bring some of the fruitage of his labour as a ‘gift’ or approach offering - much like an apple a pupil brings to a teacher to garner favour – Jehovah had not asked for this, it was something Cain did of his own accord, kindling a fire and making the smoke of it rise heavenward. Abel his little brother followed suit, he brought some the fat firstlings (plural) of his flock - being a sheepherder Gen 4:2 firstlings would most likely have been young rams and ewes and we are told that … while Jehovah was looking with favour upon Abel and his offering he did not look with favour upon Cain and his offering… A more literal reading of this verse is Gn 4:4... And heed is Yahweh giving to Abel and to his present offering ...yet to Cain and to his present offering he gave no heed... Note that in Abel’s case he gives heed, something he had not done when Cain had offered up his gift - there appears to be a time lag. Cain had offered up his gift first which Jehovah ignored, whereas later when Abel offered up his gift he paid attention.

The Hebrew word rendered heed is H8159 sha`ah shaw-aw' a primitive root; to gaze at or about (properly, for help); by implication, to inspect, consider, compassionate, be nonplussed (as looking around in amazement) or bewildered. Since Jehovah would not be gazing about for help, the extended definition would apply – namely that Jehovah was amazed nonplussed, and paid close attention to what Abel was doing. What was different about Abel’s approach gift that made Jehovah pay attention, something he had not done when Cain had offered up his gift? It is important that we arrive at an accurate understanding of what happened as this verse is a foundation plank for atonement theology.

When God had told their parents to subdue the earth, the Hebrew word rendered subdue is H3533 kabash kaw-bash' a primitive root; to tread down… http://biblehub.com/hebrew/3533.htm. The same root word is the Hebrew word for lamb, but by giving it a different Strong’s number it is well hidden. H3532 a ewe. KJV: (ewe) lamb http://biblehub.com/hebrew/3532.htm - scroll down the left hand column to the heading ‘Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance’ and you will see it has the same meaning. Take note of the Hebrew letters not the transliteration, also compare H3534. All these words have the same root, meaning of dominate, subdue, tread down.

Is this the reason God paid attention to Abel’s gift offering, had Abel interpreted God’s original instruction to his parents to subdue ( H3533) the earth by offering sheep (kebes). We know Cain misinterpreted God’s puzzled stare as being God’s approval of Abel’s offering; but should we?

From that time forward sacrificing animals as approach gifts to God became common practice. The Mosaic Law regulated practice. Besides being an approach gift it served as a tutor teaching them God’s standards of right and wrong, the sacrifice acting as a fine or penalty when they transgressed (Rom 7:7) it would lead them to Jesus. Moses had said that after him another prophet like himself would arise to whom Israel needed to listen (De 18:15) – he would present the next step in their education.

By the time Jesus came the Law was so corrupted by the voluminous record of legal wranglings of administrators looking for legal loopholes that it no longer served any useful purpose.

And this is why Jesus, the son, was killed (Mt 21:37, 40) and this is also why Caiaphas reasoned It being expedient for one man to die in behalf of the nation (John 11:49, 50). Jehovah God had known that it would come to this and it is foretold it at Isa 53:1-12, Jesus knew and had agreed to this, but the cup that he didn’t want to drink was the knowledge of what those that followed him would teach with regard to his death thereby effectively covering over and hiding all of God’s further instruction for mankind for millennia in order to allow their error to come to a completion (comp Gen 15:16) – to allow time for the leaven to do its work and make the dough rise.
I struggle to see the connection between a single LXX quote in the Hebrew epistle and somehow invalidating "atonement theology" which is rather extensive in the law and the prophets and also rests upon numerous passages in the New Testament

With regard to Ps 40:6 I had initially included this link http://biblehub.com/psalms/40-6.htm but removed it because I had too many urls. The right hand cross reference column shows how it plays a key roll in atonement theology.
Did you just claim that Satan hid the "leaven" you are talking about?
No, the woman did, the woman referred to at Isa 53:10 … but Jehovah himself took delight in crushing him… If you (should read) she will set his soul a guilt offering… The feminine form of the verb set/put/place H7760 is also used at Ex 2:3 in connection with Moses’ mother when… she is placing the child in the ark as well as in 8 other verses.
Did you just equate the idea of atonement to the leaven?

Yes, as one of its constituents.
Are you aware that the apostles taught the atonement?
I do not know what the apostles taught, we only have their letters that dealt with problems in early church and methods used to promote the teachings of Jesus amongst peoples of different cultural and religious backgrounds. From this we get a little insight into their thinking, but it must be remembered that modern translation is skewed in favour of atonement theology and that Paul himself considered what they believed as partial knowledge that would be discarded. I personally do not think they formulated any doctrine with regard to Jesus life being a ransom atoning for mankind’s sin. The ransom atonement doctrine as it is generally understood today first emerged toward the latter part of the 2nd century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom_th ... _atonement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen

This is just the beginning, but thank you again jo_el for making me yet again dig a deep for the kingdom treasure.
LRW~

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 1 guest