Flowing with milk and "honey"

[Van]

The recent Smithsonian magazine had an article that asserted the "honey" was "date honey" and not bee honey in the biblical reference. However, I looked up "honey" in scripture and sometimes the text does not clearly indicate bee honey, but on course at other times scripture does indeed indicate bee honey, such as the bees had left or use of the word translated honeycomb. After reading a lexicon I came across a third honey - grape honey.

So by the numbers:

1) Honey usually refers to bee honey. The word origin of honey is a sticky gummy substance.

2) Date honey from the dates of Date Palms is made by boiling the "meat" (inner part) then straining the "boildown." Claimed to be bottled or put into jars, and exported to places like Egypt.

3) Grape honey from "new wine" probably not fermented, because it was sweet, by boiling it down to one half or one third. Again, then placed in containers.

 

[kyredneck]

Meanwhile, the anti-type of 'the land of milk and honey' is, 'the kingdom of God is ... righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.' Romans 14:17

 

[Van]

Since two of the three "honeys" are prepared, when we see "wild honey" I think the bee variety is in view. (Matthew 3:4, Mark 1:6)

 

[Van]

Meanwhile, the anti-type of 'the land of milk and honey' is, 'the kingdom of God is ... righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.' Romans 14:17

Perhaps you meant "prototype" rather than "antitype?" Or possibly just a "type?"

 

[kyredneck]

Perhaps you meant "prototype" rather than "antitype?" Or possibly just a "type?"

No.

What is an antitype in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

The 'Exodus Motif' in the Bible is pregnant with types, of which the antitypes are revealed in the NT. Example:

Type:
13 And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and there shall no plague be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt. Ex 12

Antitype:
7 Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened. For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ: 1 Cor 5

 

[Van]

No.

What is an antitype in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

The 'Exodus Motif' in the Bible is pregnant with types, of which the antitypes are revealed in the NT. Example:

Type:
13 And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and there shall no plague be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt. Ex 12

Antitype:
7 Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened. For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ: 1 Cor 5

Thanks, I was unaware of the usage.

A type, in its primary and literal meaning, simply denotes a rough draught, or less accurate model, from which a more perfect image is made; but in the sacred or theological sense of the term, a type may be defined to be a symbol of something future and distant, or an example prepared and evidently designed by God to prefigure that future thing. What is thus prefigured is called the antitype.​

 

[kyredneck]

Thanks, I was unaware of the usage.
A type, in its primary and literal meaning, simply denotes a rough draught, or less accurate model, from which a more perfect image is made; but in the sacred or theological sense of the term, a type may be defined to be a symbol of something future and distant, or an example prepared and evidently designed by God to prefigure that future thing. What is thus prefigured is called the antitype.

A.W. Pink, who was a master at drawing out the types/antitypes in scripture, described them by 'similarities'.

Drawn from Pink's 'Gleanings in Genesis':

"Now all these things happened unto them for types; and they are written for our admonition" (1 Cor. 10:11).

"Abel is a striking type of Christ, and his murder by Cain was a remarkable foreshadowment of our Lord’s rejection and crucifixion by the Jews. At least thirty-five points of resemblance can be traced here between type and antitype. In considering Abel as a type of our Lord, it is to be noted that, like Isaac, offered up on the altar and the ram caught in a thicket, which afterwards took his place in death, we have here a double type also. Both Abel and the offering which he brought pointed to the Lord Jesus.”

36 similarities itemized:

Abel was a shepherd (Gen. 4:2)
Our Lord is a "shepherd"—the Good Shepherd—

It was as a shepherd that Abel presented his offering unto God
It was as the Shepherd He presented His offering to God (John 10:11)

Though giving no cause for it, he was hated by his brother. Cain was jealous of his brother.
Though giving no cause for it, Christ was hated by His brethren according to the flesh (John 15:25).

It was out of "envy" that Cain slew he slew Abel.
It was through "envy" that Christ was delivered up to be crucified (Matthew 27:18).

Abel then did not die a natural death.
Our Lord did not die a natural death. He was "slain" by wicked hands (Acts 2:23).

Abel met with a violent end at the hand of his own brother.
Christ was crucified by "The House of Israel" (Acts 2:36), His own brethren according to the flesh.

After his death God declared that Abel’s blood "cried" unto Him, and severe punishment was meted out upon his murderer.
After His death our Lord’s murderers were severely punished by God (Mark 12:9)

Abel presented an offering "unto God" (Heb. 11:4).
The Lord Jesus presented an offering "to God" (Eph. 5:2).

That the offering which Abel presented was "the firstlings of his flock": in other words, a "lamb."
The offering Christ presented was Himself—a "Lamb" (1 Pet. 1:19).

In bringing his offering "by faith," Abel honored and magnified the Will and Word of the Lord.
In presenting Himself as an offering He honored and magnified the Will and Word of God (Heb. 10:7-9).

The offering which Abel presented is described as an "excellent" one (Heb. 11:4).
The offering Christ presented was an "excellent" one—it was a "sweet smelling savor" (Eph. 5:2).

God had "respect unto Abel and to his offering": in other words, He accepted them.
God accepted Christ's offering: the proof of this is seen in the fact that He is now seated at God’s right hand (Heb. 10:12).

In the presentation of his offering Abel "obtained witness that he was righteous" (Heb. 11:4).
While presenting Himself on the Cross as an offering to God, Christ "obtained witness that He was righteous "—the centurion crying, "Certainly this was a righteous man" (Luke 23:47).

After Abel had presented his offering, God publicly "testified" His acceptance of it.
God publicly testified His acceptance of Christ’s offering by raising Him from the dead (Acts 2:32).

Abel’s offering still "speaks" to God—"By it he being dead yet speaketh."
Christ’s offering now "speaks" to God (Heb. 12:24).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just as Abel and his offering are, at every point, a wonderful type of Christ and His offering, so Cain, who slew Abel, prefigures the Jews, who crucified their Messiah.

Cain was "a tiller of the ground" (Gen. 4:2). Thus the first thing told us about him connects him with the land.
The first thing which is conspicuous about the Jews was that they were the people of a land the promised land, the Holy Land (Gen. 13:15).

In refusing to bring the required lamb, Cain rejected the offering which God’s grace had provided.
In refusing the Lamb of God (John 1:11) the Jews rejected the offering which God’s grace had provided.

In his self-righteousness Cain brought an offering of his own choosing.
The apostle Paul declares that the Jews were "ignorant of God’s righteousness and going about to establish their own righteousness" (Rom. 10:3).

The offering he brought was the product of his own labors.
The Jews rested upon their own obedience to God’s Law (Rom. 9:21).

This offering was rejected by God.
But God had no respect to the Jew's works (Acts 13:39).

It was Cain’s God-given privilege to rule over his brother (Gen. 4:7).
Had Israel walked in God’s statutes they would have been the head of the nations (Deut. 28:13).

Cain forfeited his God-given privilege to rule over his brother.
But through sin the Jews forfeited the place and privilege (Isa. 9:14).

Being envious of Abel, Cain wickedly slew him.
It was the Jews who crucified the Christ of God (Acts 5:30).

God charged Cain with his crime.
God charged the Jews with their crime (Acts 2:22, 23).

God told Cain that Abel’s blood cried for vengeance.
Christ’s blood is now judicially resting "upon" the Jews (Matthew 27:25).

Because of the shedding of his brother’s blood, God’s curse fell upon Cain.
Because of the crucifixion of their Messiah, God’s curse fell upon Israel (Jer. 24:9)

Part of Cain's punishment consisted in the ground becoming barren to him (Gen. 4:12).
Part of the curse which God threatened of old to bring upon Israel was the barrenness of their land—"desolate" (Lev. 26:34, 35).

Further, Cain was to be a fugitive and vagabond in the earth.
The Jew has been an age-long wanderer in the earth (Deut. 28:65).

Cain acknowledged that his punishment was greater than he could bear.
Israel will yet acknowledge their punishment is greater than they can bear (Zech.12:10).

Because of his sin, he was "driven out" (Gen. 4:14).
Forty years after the Crucifixion, Israel was driven out of Palestine.

Because of his sin, he was hidden from God’s face.
Since the Crucifiction, God’s face has been hid from the Jews. (Hosea 1:9).

Every man’s hand was now against Cain (Gen. 4:14).
For nigh 2,000 years, almost every man’s hand has been against the Jew (Deut. 28:66).

God set a mark upon him (Gen. 4:15).
A mark of identification has been placed upon the Jew so that he can be recognized anywhere.

God declared that He would visit with a sevenfold vengeance those who slew Cain.
God’s special curse has always rested on those who have cursed Israel (Gen. 12:3).

Cain left the land and went and dwelt in a city (Gen. 4:17).
For the most part, even to this day, the Jews continue to congregate in large cities.

“Upon what ground can we account for this remarkable agreement between type and antitype? The only possible explanation lies in the supernatural inspiration of the Old Testament Scriptures. The Holy Spirit "moved" the writer of Genesis. Only He who knew the end from the beginning could have foreshadowed so accurately and minutely that which came to pass thousands of years afterwards. Prophecy, either in direct utterance or in symbolic type, is the Divine autograph upon the sacred page. May God continue to strengthen our faith in the divinity, the authority and the absolute sufficiency of the Holy Oracles.”

 

[Van]

I am not overly fond of typology, but the concept is sound. Parables present something understood by the audience at the time, and lay beside the example a similar spiritual truth. Thus, we can see the OT narratives at times as "living parables" teaching us timeless lessons of God and His righteousness.

Seeking the goodness of the land flowing with milk and honey demonstrates the desirably of God's domain. And those who did not listen to the voice of the LORD, lost their opportunity to enter it.

 

[kyredneck]

Parables present something understood by the audience at the time

????? Not!

Why did His disciples ask Him to explain the parables if they were easy to understand?

Why did He speak in parables?:

10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 And he answered and said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. Mk 4

He spoke in parables so that the multitude WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND.

What are parables?:

2 Son of man, put forth a riddle, and speak a parable unto the house of Israel; Ezek 17

2 I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings of old, Ps 78:2
4 I will incline mine ear to a parable: I will open my dark saying upon the harp. Ps 49

25 These things have I spoken unto you in dark sayings: the hour cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in dark sayings, but shall tell you plainly of the Father.
29 His disciples say, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no dark saying. Jn 16

Parables are riddles or dark sayings and are exactly the opposite of plain speech.

 

[Van]

????? Not!

Why did His disciples ask Him to explain the parables if they were easy to understand?

Why did He speak in parables?:

Parables are riddles or dark sayings and are exactly the opposite of plain speech.

???? NOT!!

1. metaph.
   1. a comparing, comparison of one thing with another, likeness, similitude
      
      
   2. an example by which a doctrine or precept is illustrated
      
      
   3. a narrative, fictitious but agreeable to the laws and usages of human life, by which either the duties of men or the things of God, particularly the nature and history of God's kingdom are figuratively portrayed
      
      
   4. a parable: an earthly story with a heavenly meaning

A parable can be explained to illustrate a spiritual truth, but others in scripture are not explained, thus intended to be utilized as is. See Mark 4:2

In Luke 12:16-21 we see a parable which includes the explanation of the spiritual truth illustrated.

Yes, Jesus did not always include the explanation to His entire audience, as in Matthew 13, but He did explain it to His disciples, and by way of inspired scripture to us. The Greek word translates parable appears about 50 times in scripture.
​

 

[kyredneck]

Parables present something understood by the audience at the time

'That generation' of Christ's day was the 'flock of slaughter' that was foretold of in Zechariah:

4 Thus said Jehovah my God: Feed the flock of slaughter;
5 whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty; and they that sell them say, Blessed be Jehovah, for I am rich; and their own shepherds pity them not.
6 For I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, saith Jehovah; but, lo, I will deliver the men every one into his neighbor`s hand, and into the hand of his king; and they shall smite the land, and out of their hand I will not deliver them.
7 So I fed the flock of slaughter, verily the poor of the flock. And I took unto me two staves; the one I called Beauty, and the other I called Bands; and I fed the flock.
8 And I cut off the three shepherds in one month; for my soul was weary of them, and their soul also loathed me.
9 Then said I, I will not feed you: that which dieth, let it die; and that which is to be cut off, let it be cut off; and let them that are left eat every one the flesh of another.
10 And I took my staff Beauty, and cut it asunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made with all the peoples.
11 And it was broken in that day; and thus the poor of the flock that gave heed unto me knew that it was the word of Jehovah.
12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my hire; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my hire thirty pieces of silver.
13 And Jehovah said unto me, Cast it unto the potter, the goodly price that I was prized at by them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them unto the potter, in the house of Jehovah. Zech 11

Parables, riddles, dark sayings are what He fed the flock of slaughter. Christ had no intention for them to understand and feign repentance:

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables; because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
14 And unto them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall in no wise understand; And seeing ye shall see, and shall in no wise perceive:
15 For this people`s heart is waxed gross, And their ears are dull of hearing, And their eyes they have closed; Lest haply they should perceive with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And should turn again, And I should heal them. Mt 13

 

[Van]

Parables, riddles, dark sayings are what He fed the flock of slaughter. Christ had no intention for them to understand and feign repentance:

Utter nonsense, as many parables include the explanation.

 

[kyredneck]

Utter nonsense

Not. Fact.

"Therefore speak I to them in parables...Lest haply they should perceive with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And should turn again, And I should heal them."

many parables include the explanation.

Actually, most do not include explanations.

I am not overly fond of typology

Yea, I know, you prefer the utter nonsense of your humanistic Vanology.

 

[Van]

Not. Fact.

"Therefore speak I to them in parables...Lest haply they should perceive with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And should turn again, And I should heal them."

Actually, most do not include explanations.
Yea, I know, you prefer the utter nonsense of your humanistic Vanology.

Calling the obvious truth of scripture humanistic, while believing your unstudied Falseology has value is sad.

 

[kyredneck]

many parables include the explanation.

Actually, most do not include explanations.

FEW include explanations. Of the 39 or so parables of Christ, probably not a handful are explained. I can think only of three.

 

[kyredneck]

probably not a handful are explained. I can think only of three.

Matthew 13:18 - Parable of the Sower (and I guarantee we'd still disagree on the interpretation of it)

Matthew 13:36 - Parable of the Tares of the Field (and I guarantee we'd still disagree on the interpretation of this one too)

Matthew 15:15 - Parable of what defiles a man (maybe, just maybe, we'd have some agreement on this one)

 

[unprofitable]

Utter nonsense, as many parables include the explanation.

Mt 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again an rend you.

Violence against the kingdom.

 

[Van]

Mt 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again an rend you.

Violence against the kingdom.

Disinformation concerning the use of parables in scripture is "violence against" God's word. Some parables need no explanation as the context provides discernible truth.

Parable

1. metaph.
   
   1. a comparing, comparison of one thing with another, likeness, similitude
      
      
   2. an example by which a doctrine or precept is illustrated
      
      
   3. a narrative, fictitious but agreeable to the laws and usages of human life, by which either the duties of men or the things of God, particularly the nature and history of God's kingdom are figuratively portrayed
      
      
   4. a parable: an earthly story with a heavenly meaning
      

 

[Van]

What did the parable of putting a new cloth on an old coat illustrate? Jesus was providing a new covenant, and it was not a patch for the old covenant, in fact, the new would rip the old asunder.

Dido for new wine in old wineskins.

Not put the light of the world under a basket, means we are to "let it shine, let it shine."

We are to put our belief on the solid rock and not the shifting sand of man.

I could go on but the point has been made, the parables in the NT are for out benefit, teaching us about the house of God.

 

[unprofitable]

The question is who is able to receive (he who hath an ear) the meaning of the parables.

Those who have an ear, being born from above, are able to receive instruction (Proverbs 19:20) and good doctrine (Proverbs 4:2). These are the members of the body of Christ, the kingdom of God,

Those who refuse instruction of the kingdom of God (Proverbs 10:17) do not have an ear to hear. It is the reason Christ refused to speak to them that they might understand because they will pervert right doctrine and fight against the kingdom of God. This is the violence of those spoken of in Mattew 11:12.

Christ therefore warned his disciples not to reveal the truth of the kingdom because he knew they would turn like swine and rend or commit violence against them as the little one of the kingdom. These swine could not discern between good and evil doctrine,
We must then ask why would Christ give his kingdom to them if all they could/would do is destroy it?

The parables then serve two purposes. It prevents those in an unregenerate state from receiving the kingdom of God in the form of the new covenant church. It also instructs those made alive, the will of the Father concerning how they are to edify the kingdom of God.