Tom, you didn’t poke a hole in anything my friend. Apparently, you interpret that parable differently than I do. But that is no surprise, seeing that you probably interpret MANY Scriptures differently than I do. Don’t you see?
In 1 Corinthians Paul refering to Passover, says, "Therefore, let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth. 1 Cor. 5:8 Again, here we see yeast as representing wickedness, evil.
Also, the parable of the mustard seed, and yeast go together. According to my Bible, the mustard seed and yeast are paired. The mustard seed represents the kingdom and it’s development from a small beginning, into something that flourishes. The birds are snalogous to evil imposters who will steal away the truth in the kingdom. There is basis for this in Matthew 13, where birds are an agent of destruction, as well as in Revelation, where birds are unclean, and detestable. My point is that the parables go together, as one.
Just trust me Tom. In Scripture, yeast is never good. I’ve given you plenty of evidence of that already, Why deny it?
Good grief! Tom was as plain as plain can be and you STILL don’t see his point, Adam! Why, I could talk until I was blue in the face, present you with all the contradictions in your argument, and…oh wait, those are your lines of argument. Nevermind.
I see Tom’s point. I just don’t agree with it. He says that the kingdom of heaven = yeast. Well, the Scripture says MORE than that. There’s a lot between the lines, that we don’t see, until further examination of Scripture. Which, of course, reveals my point, that the parable describes false teaching and corruption that has infiltrated the entire kingdom of God.
Just a second, ARG220; are you saying that the Kingdom of God has evil within in it? What would that evil be? Who would be perpetrating that evil? Would they be Christians? If not, how could they not be if they are part of the Kingdom of God?
Actualy there was only one such letter, a forgery, and the forger happens to reside in the Utah State Prison System for the rest of his natural life because he’s also a murderer (killed two folks). A number of your ilk, ARG, used that “Salamander Letter” as “proof” the LDS church is a crock. Too bad they didn’t keep up with the times.
However, what we are left here is your implication that you don’t have to research what you attack as false to know it’s false. Okay, how do you know it’s false without examining it?
In response to you saying I’m accusing you of not reading your Bible: I don’t accuse you; you have accused yourself of that by your explicit admission you have not read the whole thing.
WHOA! Adam admitted to not having read the Bible in its entirety???!?
Oh, wow. Oh, Adam. That’s REALLY screwing the pooch. But about what I’d expect from someone who’s clearly terrified to engage in ANYTHING even resembling critical thinking.
To answer the topic’s question, NO, Adam. You are in no way a good debater. You clearly aren’t as talented as you have claimed at arguing. An agrument, to borrow liberally from Python, is NOT just the automatic gainsaying of whatever the other person has to say.
Oh, I get it. It’s the stuff between the lines that nobody sees that determines how we interpret scripture! I dunno, Adam, this smacks of “private interpretation” to me, and you know that’s a no-no.
Hee, hee, hee. This is great! We now get to see how Adam really looks at the world. To wit:
Adam (in a display that could only cause Humpty-Dumpty great envy) chooses exactly what Scripture is supposed to say. He then gets to tell everyone who does not accept his version of Scripture that they are not truly following the Bible and, therefore, are not truly Christian.
Let us, just for the sake of discussion, examine Mt 13:33.
Adam says leaven (yeast) always represents evil. The verse says that the kingdom of heaven is like leaven. Substituting “evil” for “leaven” we find that Jesus says “The kingdom of heaven is like {evil}.” Adam also says that the complete verse shows the woman “hiding” the (evil) leaven in the flour. In other words, according to Adam, Jesus says “The Kingdom of heaven is like {evil} that a woman hides.”
OK. Not exactly the interpretation that I’d have given it, but Adam has told us that he is certainly more knowledgable about how God wants His Scriptures interpreted than I am.
Ah! But then Adam points out that in HIS Bible verse 33 is joined to verses 31-32 where the kingdom of heaven is compared to a mustard seed. He may have to rethink his position, of course: I also think that the verses form a couplet.
In my humble offering, the kingdom of heaven is compared to two unprepossessing items, a tiny seed that will grow into a huge shrub and a small lump of dough that can cause three full measures of flour to rise.
However, Adam can’t have that. He joins verses 31-32 and 33 together into a single parable. He has not yet explained what the meaning would then be. (Perhaps, the kingdom of heaven is like a small seed that grows into an enormous pernicious weed and also a lump of dough that must be hidden? I dunno.)
Well, gee, let’s check Adam’s brilliant scholarship. At the beginning of verse 31, in the Greek, we find these words “'Allên parabôlên parethêchen autois legôn. . .” which translate pretty easily to “Another parable he set before them saying. . .” OK.
Unfortunately, when we look at verse 33, we find “Allên parabôlên 'elalêsen autois. . .” which also is pretty easy to translate: “Another parable he spoke to them. . .” In other words, verse 33 says that there is a new (i.e., different) parable being preached.
But, of course, the text must be wrong because Adam has already pointed out that the three verses make up a single parable.
–
You know, Adam, we could have avoided this little demonstration. In my post of 03:40 pm I mentioned that you merely had to substitute “yeast usually represents evil” for “yeast always represents evil.” However, you are always so sure that you have been divinely inspired with the knowledge of God’s words and intents that you simply had to post your rather absurd interpretation.
Note that I have never claimed that Paul did not use yeast as a negative symbol. I simply responded to your assertion that “yeast always equals evil” with a single instance where yeast was used as a positive symbol. You are the one who hung yourself in your arrogance. (Of course, I’m dying to know what message you thought Jesus was trying to convey by saying that the “kingdom of heaven” = “yeast” = “evil”.)
As for this interesting post
For crying out loud, Adam. It’s a two-clause parable intended to be understood by simple shepherds and villagers. I’ll grant that you can find deep meaning in it, but starting out with the preconceived notion that yeast has to be evil so it does not mean what it says is pushing it just a bit.
Tell you what, print out your interpretation of “the kingdom of heaven” = “yeast” = “evil” and take it to your pastor. I’d love to hear what he makes of it.
Adam: What I’d like to know is, where do you pick up a copy of this “read-between-the-lines” Bible? It must be selling like hotcakes, because you can ascribe any old doctrine to it that you like (the print being invisible and all).
Maybe that’s what NIV stands for: New Invisible Bible. Complete with non-footnotes and a non-commentary in the back. Can I use invisible money to buy this thing?
[Yeast] is deceptive, and infiltrates the entire kingdom. We must be on our guard against this yeast though
Tell me more about this insidious, evil yeast. Lynn, is this your doing?}} Snarkberry
It wasn’t me. This time.
Though I do have an abcess on my breast, about half the size of a golf ball. I’m starting on antibiotics, so I imagine that I’ll get a yeast infection in about…oh, 18-24 hours or so. And it WILL be EVIL yeast.
Tom. I never said it was ONE parable. It is TWO parables. BUT, from the text, it’s clear that they go together. As in a single little message. For crying out loud Tom, don’t you read my posts? That pretty much makes your post irrelevant. I already explained what the parable of the yeast means. And if I took iot to my pastor, I’m sure he’s say, “Yep, I agree.”
BTW, I don’t have some power that enables me to interpret Scripture like this. As I said above, MY BIBLE says that the parables are a pair. As in, the study guide on the bottom of the page. That’s what I love about this Bible. If you don’t get it, it explains it fully to you.
Dammit, where are my manners? You’d think I was from Youngstown, Ohio or something, the way I’ve been acting today. Please take my insults with a grain of salt, Adam–you know, I do love you as a brother, even if I do follow you around and pick on you sometimes on the SDMB like I’ve been doing today. Damn! I’ve been acting like crap today.
I can’t believe I’m wading into this ::shaking head at own foolishness::
Adam, you do realize, don’t you, that the comments at the bottom of a study Bible are not part of the Bible? They are interpretations of fallible men such as yourself. Even if you do believe that the Bible is the absolute word of God, that doesn’t mean the annotations are. Right? So, for a change, why don’t you try thinking for yourself? You may reach the same conclusion you’ve reached now, but at least you’ll have made up your own mind.
Adam: I looked through TWO bibles that I have at my house. A 1991 version of the New American Bible, and an 1849 version of the bible from the American Bible Society, and BOTH state that the mustard seed parable, and the parable of the yeast are S E P A R A T E
parables. They are not a part of the same parable. You are wrong Adam. Admit it.
From The mustard seed parable, part of the first sentence from both bibles: 1. He proposed another parable to them, 2. Another parable he put forth unto them saying,…
From the parable of the yeast, part of the first sentence from both bibles: 1. He spoke to them another parable., 2. Another parable he spake unto them,…
So, you say yeast represents corruption and sin, and the parable of the yeast says the Kingdom of God is like yeast. Hmm so i guess you say the Kingdom of heaven is corrupt and full of sin. Just like everyone else here has pointed out to you.
There you have it, I have TWO bibles (and I have two other bibles also) that both clearly state that they are separate parables not part of the same one. One written 142 years earlier than the other one. Of course you will probably claim that both are false and have twisted the scriptures, but I beg to differ.
Oh BTW: I noticed you quote from the King James bible. Probably one of THE worst translations of the bible ever published.
Ok I will give you this Adam: They are a part of the same message (See, I can admit I am wrong). However, it says something VERY different from your interpretation:
**
**
So again Adam, you don’t seem to understand what the message truly is.
