Matt 13:24 the wheat and the tares

ttruscott · Post by **ttruscott** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:09 pm

Do you believe that all our sins are equal in Adam and gernerally our salvation is from the condemnation for our sins here on earth?

Let's discuss how the parable of the wheat and the tares impacts these ideas...

Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

The points for discussion:

Are the wheat reborn tares?

Whose 'fault' is it that the tares are sown in the field?

Why must the wheat live with the tares and suffer them?

What changes so that the angels may now bundle the tares to be burnt?

Peace, Ted

ElCodeMonkey · Post by **ElCodeMonkey** » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:26 am

Impatient sighs add nothing to your argument but rather take away from it. As do your false insinuations regarding my studies. Your responses gloss over my statements without actually refuting anything. I showed exactly how "world" is used in reference to poeple both with my own words and those of Jesus. If that can't drive a logical response then it appears you are not open to discussion. You don't have to agree with the interpretation, but to refute the interpretation it helps to use logic as opposed to insults. It was clear to begin with that your post only offered a fight which is why you lacked the responses you desired. Clearly your thirst has not dissipated. I'd recommend checking your fruit and determining what manner of tree you are. Good day.

Wootah · Post by **Wootah** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 6:04 am

In the parable of the weeds the point is that we do not know who is a wheat and who is a tare and should not judge, lest we be judged I might add!

I don't think it means that Jesus planted one type of person and the devil another because that interpretation gives evil creative power, which is an oxymoron.

ElCodeMonkey · Post by **ElCodeMonkey** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:59 am

Wootah wrote: In the parable of the weeds the point is that we do not know who is a wheat and who is a tare and should not judge, lest we be judged I might add!

I don't think it means that Jesus planted one type of person and the devil another because that interpretation gives evil creative power, which is an oxymoron.

Clearly I don't disagree, but I don't understand what would be an oxymoron in this case nor why that matters.

ElCodeMonkey · Post by **ElCodeMonkey** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 9:01 am

ElCodeMonkey wrote:
Wootah wrote: In the parable of the weeds the point is that we do not know who is a wheat and who is a tare and should not judge, lest we be judged I might add!

I don't think it means that Jesus planted one type of person and the devil another because that interpretation gives evil creative power, which is an oxymoron.
Clearly I don't disagree, but I don't understand what would be an oxymoron in this case nor why that matters.

To clarify, I meant that I agree that it's not people being planted. As for the "point" of it, I think I've made my own point already which disagrees with you in that we can indeed know. You know a tree by its fruit.

ttruscott · Post by **ttruscott** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 12:25 pm

ElCodeMonkey wrote: ...

Ahhh found this again.

you are right, I was getting frustrated and I'm sorry. As for not answering - everything I wrote was in answer.

Peace, Ted

ElCodeMonkey · Post by **ElCodeMonkey** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 12:37 pm

ttruscott wrote:
ElCodeMonkey wrote: ...
Ahhh found this again.

you are right, I was getting frustrated and I'm sorry. As for not answering - everything I wrote was in answer.

Peace, Ted

Thank you for your response. I now have much greater respect for you

. I would still like clarification though as I showed how "world" was used in the way I mentioned but you seemed to disregard it. Any particular reason you disregard it as invalid?

ttruscott · Post by **ttruscott** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:10 pm

Wootah wrote: In the parable of the weeds the point is that we do not know who is a wheat and who is a tare and should not judge, lest we be judged I might add!

I don't think it means that Jesus planted one type of person and the devil another because that interpretation gives evil creative power, which is an oxymoron.

Not my interpretation, only yours. And please don't lay no boogie woogie on the king of rock and roll... to quote long John Baldry,

The devil has no creative power at all and contrary to your assessment of PCE, we do not contend other wise. I think the point is exactly what it says, Jesus plants some people into bodies here and lets / allows the devil plant his children into other bodies, probably chosen for that by GOD. Satan doesn't get to create either the follower or the body, just use them as a home for his followers, his children, the fallen angels, the reprobate demons and devils.

This of course IMPLIES that all of HIS creation had been separated into good seed and evil tares before they were sent into a human body on earth. And this opens the door to us to understand that, if we existed before coming to earth and if we are enslaved [only] on earth then it is possible we had our true free will choices about our eternal relationship (as good or as evil) before becoming human and that our choices are the basis of our election to heaven or to hell.

Peace, Ted

ttruscott · Post by **ttruscott** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:22 pm

ElCodeMonkey wrote:
...

I would still like clarification though as I showed how "world" was used in the way I mentioned but you seemed to disregard it. Any particular reason you disregard it as invalid?

Ummm...

ttruscott wrote:
ElCodeMonkey wrote:
...

Saying that the field is the world can easily be taken as "the people of the world." For example, if I were to say that the world is crazy, it should be clear that I speak of the people inhabiting it and not the planet itself. In fact, John 1:10 will give this exact usage by saying "the world knew him not".
This is very agreeable, seeds sown among the people of the world, except for the first, eh? Then the world has to be the earth of dirt.

This was my reply then. Why do you claim I disregarded it when I agreed with you???

Peace, Ted

ElCodeMonkey · Post by **ElCodeMonkey** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:02 pm

ttruscott wrote:
ElCodeMonkey wrote:
...

I would still like clarification though as I showed how "world" was used in the way I mentioned but you seemed to disregard it. Any particular reason you disregard it as invalid?
Ummm...

ttruscott wrote:
ElCodeMonkey wrote:
...

Saying that the field is the world can easily be taken as "the people of the world." For example, if I were to say that the world is crazy, it should be clear that I speak of the people inhabiting it and not the planet itself. In fact, John 1:10 will give this exact usage by saying "the world knew him not".
This is very agreeable, seeds sown among the people of the world, except for the first, eh? Then the world has to be the earth of dirt.
This was my reply then. Why do you claim I disregarded it when I agreed with you???

Peace, Ted

I apologize; I misunderstood your sentence regarding the octopus and thought it was in regard to the world being the people and dismissing it. Clearly my mistake. Though I'm not sure I'm understanding your agreement. It still sounds like a disagreement since you say the world must be the earth of dirt. I'm saying you can sow seed into a person's "heart" and if that heart is like the wayside, the thorns, the rocks, or the good soil, it either springs up, gets choked, etc. But on top of "where" it's planted (or the goodness of the soil of the heart) there is also the problem with a corrupt seed ALSO being planted. Jesus spent 3.5 years spreading good seed. After he was done, an enemy came and planted bad seed. Jesus didn't go planting people, he planted seeds as in his first parable. Likewise, evil people (or the devil if you really want to blame him), planted false seed and mingled with the field in which Jesus planted in.

Wootah · Post by **Wootah** » Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:47 pm

ElCodeMonkey wrote:
ElCodeMonkey wrote:
Wootah wrote: In the parable of the weeds the point is that we do not know who is a wheat and who is a tare and should not judge, lest we be judged I might add!

I don't think it means that Jesus planted one type of person and the devil another because that interpretation gives evil creative power, which is an oxymoron.
Clearly I don't disagree, but I don't understand what would be an oxymoron in this case nor why that matters.
To clarify, I meant that I agree that it's not people being planted. As for the "point" of it, I think I've made my own point already which disagrees with you in that we can indeed know. You know a tree by its fruit.

The criminal on the cross with Jesus had no fruit and yet he is in heaven. That would indicate that we can know who is a wheat better than who is a tare?