Questions for dispensationalists

[John of Japan]

I think the writers of the hermeneutics books may have got this one wrong if we have confidence in Mt 13:34-35. Jesus seems to be saying the parables are a source of revealing previously hidden truths since creation but now is coming to pass. It seems to me the parables are the device God has chosen for explanation of these events when they come to pass. I do not want to be spooky here but in this manner he hides these things from the unwashed while revealing them to the spiritual mind. In this way they are prophecy.

Good point, and thank you for your answer, but this passage does not teach that there is more than one central meaning per parable. I look at the parables as the sermon illustrations of Jesus. They present the doctrine, they adorn the doctrine, but they don't teach the details of the doctrine.

Take a look at the incomplete understanding of the apostles when Jesus nears Jerusalem a week before Passover, thinking that Jesus was coming to establish his earthy physical kingdom.

Lu 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.

He showed via this parable that there would be an interim yet they still would not understand it until after they were saved and the Spirit in them revealed it.

Again, this understanding does not mitigate against the hermeneutic principle that there is one central teaching per parable. "Determine the one central truth the parable is attempting to teach" [italics in original]. This might be called the golden rule of parabolic interpretation for practically all writers on the subject mention it with stress" (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, by Barnard Ramm, p. 261).

Joh 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Obviously these disciples did not understand the two comings of the Messiah with a space of time between them because it was not a subject in the OT, and besides, OT saints were natural men making them unable to understand the mind of God.

This is some of my thoughts and is my opinion.

I agree with your statements here, but don't believe they prove your original point, so I will stick to the hermeneutic principle of one parable = one doctrine.

 

[JesusFan]

Good point, and thank you for your answer, but this passage does not teach that there is more than one central meaning per parable. I look at the parables as the sermon illustrations of Jesus. They present the doctrine, they adorn the doctrine, but they don't teach the details of the doctrine.

Again, this understanding does not mitigate against the hermeneutic principle that there is one central teaching per parable. "Determine the one central truth the parable is attempting to teach" [italics in original]. This might be called the golden rule of parabolic interpretation for practically all writers on the subject mention it with stress" (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, by Barnard Ramm, p. 261).

I agree with your statements here, but don't believe they prove your original point, so I will stick to the hermeneutic principle of one parable = one doctrine.

True, one main point, and rest of the story to flesh it out to give a complete word picture to that main point

 

[JD731]

Good point, and thank you for your answer, but this passage does not teach that there is more than one central meaning per parable. I look at the parables as the sermon illustrations of Jesus. They present the doctrine, they adorn the doctrine, but they don't teach the details of the doctrine.

Again, this understanding does not mitigate against the hermeneutic principle that there is one central teaching per parable. "Determine the one central truth the parable is attempting to teach" [italics in original]. This might be called the golden rule of parabolic interpretation for practically all writers on the subject mention it with stress" (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, by Barnard Ramm, p. 261).

I agree with your statements here, but don't believe they prove your original point, so I will stick to the hermeneutic principle of one parable = one doctrine.

John of Japan, I am so sorry that I framed my words in a manner to have you think I believe the parables to have multiple meanings because I do not believe that at all. When a person ,place, of thing is chosen as a figure of something else it always represents that. Jesus told us how we must understand parables in the Bible. It is by having a divine teacher.

Mr 4:9 And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?

Those of us who are saved have a resident Divine teacher, the Spirit of God, and there are not parables post resurrection of Jesus Christ but the symbolic words meanings established by the parables in the OT still apply to the terms and gives them a spiritual meaning, I believe, and thus a double meaning, both our own language and the language of God. It takes both meanings for understanding and sound doctrine and answers to why I am KJV only. Changing the words often takes the spiritual quality away.

That is where I stand on the scriptures but if you do not agree it is OK. No harm, no foul.

 

[John of Japan]

John of Japan, I am so sorry that I framed my words in a manner to have you think I believe the parables to have multiple meanings because I do not believe that at all. When a person ,place, of thing is chosen as a figure of something else it always represents that. Jesus told us how we must understand parables in the Bible. It is by having a divine teacher.

No problem at all. We know each other after having been on the BB for years!

Mr 4:9 And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?

Those of us who are saved have a resident Divine teacher, the Spirit of God, and there are not parables post resurrection of Jesus Christ but the symbolic words meanings established by the parables in the OT still apply to the terms and gives them a spiritual meaning, I believe, and thus a double meaning, both our own language and the language of God. It takes both meanings for understanding and sound doctrine and answers to why I am KJV only. Changing the words often takes the spiritual quality away.

I think I catch your meaning here, and we are not that far apart.

That is where I stand on the scriptures but if you do not agree it is OK. No harm, no foul.

Amen.