Paul's Gospel

[Muna]

Many people have never deeply examined this topic and therefore cannot defend it, having accepted it unquestioningly as truth. It is the intensity of the questions asked, and the answers given that can make the difference for someone who is uncertain, prompting them to open the Word and explore it for themselves. A good example is Dak’s position on the Bride. Although I knew his view was incorrect, I still considered it carefully to better understand his reasoning. While I remain unsure why he opposes the concept of being the Bride of Christ, this teaching is clearly found in the Bible. This kind of growth can only happen when we ask questions and allow the Word to guide and teach us. Now you might not like the approach, and I get that but, in the end, if truth is gain through the process how can it be wrong?

Apostle said "prove all things"...and this is what we must do! Dak is doing it, I am doing it and so are you.

I do understand, the reason I said to just post it and leave it (since you feel very confident that you can defend it) leaves you a wide open space to do it. On forums like this people often look to find fault (sometimes there is a fault, sometimes there isn't one) but I do believe they like to cross examine things (which they ought to do). Othertimes, they might jump too soon to critique what others have put forth (without thinking it through) and fewer still might just take it up because they love strife, and for the sake of proving them wrong. The whole " king of the hill" (sort of thing). However, in your case (being confident as you are) this would only work for you then. That's how I am seeing it. That way, you put it out there, for others to prove your work (in this way). Rather then running into thread after thread trying to seek engagement on this thing (because you believe its important for them). Just "lay the thing out" and just sit back and wait for the inevitable "incoming" and defend it accordingly.

I used to love to do that myself. I would work on something (study it) and test that thing every which way I could (for myself) until I was thoroughly convinced of where I stood with it. THEN I would put it out there, just to make sure I did not have any blind spots on my side of things. And so I looked forward to putting that thing out there to be ripped to shreds (because if it could be, it certainly will be). That has "served me" in the word, and been very beneficial "for me" so I might tie up any loose ends which I might have failed to consider (for my own correction). But my intent would be to strengthen (or sharpen) my own understanding not really to push that onto them (but rather, invite that push back from them). Sometimes I got lucky and it was some decent push back and at other times it was not. Regardless it was still good.

I don't really do that too much anymore, I will just join a thread or two and add to that thread what I think it might be helpful (drop and go) until I have a drop (and bite) but I would think that would be an excellent way for you to go about it, so you can prove it through the push back of others. But I would just wait until those willing paticipants show up to do so. It would take a whole lot less effort and chasing folks around concerning it.

Thats all I will say, I don't want to keep derailing the thread on this either.

 

[pandaflower]

In 1Cor 11:23 Paul says, "For I received of the Master that which I also delivered unto you", meaning that he delivered to them what he himself had received, and then he quotes directly word for word verbatim from the Gospel account which we know as Luke.

1 Corinthians 11:23-25 ASV
23 For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread; [Luke 22:19a]
24 and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me. [Luke 22:19]
25 In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: [Luke 22:a-b] this do, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

Luke 22:19-20 ASV
19 And he took bread, [1Cor 11:23b] and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and gave to them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. [1Cor 11:24]
20 And the cup in like manner after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood, [1Cor 11:25a-b] even that which is poured out for you.

This passage from Luke 22:19-20 was given to Paul, according to his own testimony, and he says he also delivered it to the Corinthians: that is surely speaking of a writing, and the writing is the Gospel account we now know as Luke, obviously, from the quote of Luke 22:19-20 found in this epistle to the Corinthians. Paul then says the same again, later in the same epistle.

1 Corinthians 14:36 ASV
36 What? was it from you that the word of God went forth? or came it unto you alone?

The Word of Elohim had come to them: the Gospel account we now know as Luke.

1 Corinthians 14:37-38
37 If any man thinketh himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto you, that they are the commandment(s) of the Lord.
38 But if any man is ignorant, let him be ignorant.

The things Paul writes to them concern the commandments of the Master, and he is reminding them that he speaks of that which he had received, which he had also delivered unto them: the Gospel account we know as Luke. And the next chapter is still the same passage, and thus the same context, and he reminds them again therein that he had delivered unto them what he himself had also received: the Gospel account now known as Luke.

1 Corinthians 15:1-8 ASV
1 Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand,
2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; [(writings) Gospel of Luke]
4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures; [(writings) Gospel of Luke]
5 and that he appeared to Cephas; [Luke 24:34] then to the twelve; ["the Eleven", Luke 24:33, proven at this link]
6 then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep;
7 then he appeared to James; then to all the apostles;
8 and last of all, as to the child untimely born, he appeared to me also.

Therefore it is imperative that one understands where Paul, (Shaul at that point), did indeed receive what he had also delivered to his congregations, obviously including also the Galatians according to what he writes to them in Gal 3:1, (as will be shown below). Where did Paul receive his Gospel? He received it immediately upon his initial conversion, right after the appearance of the Master to him near Damascus, and it was given to him by Hananyah, (Ananias), when Hananyah was commanded by the Master to seek out Shaul, and go lay the Power upon him so that he might receive sight.

All one needs to be able to understand this is to understand that the word hand in Hebrew-Biblical thought represents power. Hananyah did not necessarily lay his own physical hands on Paul, and the Greek text does not say that, it rather says he laid the hands, not his hands, upon Shaul, (Acts 9:12, Acts 9:17). So Hananyah laid the Power upon Shaul, and the Power is the Word, and therefore surely the Testimony of the Master in the Gospel accounts in this case: for Shaul already knew the rest of the scripture found in the Hebrew scriptures, but was blind to what they truly teach and preach, and it is the Testimony of the Master which expounds all things of the Torah, Prophets, and Writings in the Hebrew scriptures.

Hananyah gave Shaul a record of what has now come to be known as the Gospel of Luke. And when Hananyah did so, what then was it which he admonished Shaul to do? Hananyah admonished Shaul to arise and be immersed, (Acts 22:16). Immerse in what? Immersion is not literal water immersion: Biblical immersion is immersion into the Word of Elohim. Thus Shaul went into Arabia, (for six months, but that is another line of discussion), and he immersed in the Gospel which Hananyah had laid upon him: the Power of Elohim, the Word of Elohim, and in this case it was the Gospel we now know as Luke by way of the quote we have from that Gospel account in 1Cor 11:23-25.

Now therefore the Galatians, according to Gal 3:1, had indeed begun in the Spirit, which is the Testimony of the Master, which is Spirit, (John 6:63), for Paul had delivered unto the Galatians that which he himself had also received, just as he says he did with the Corinthians.

The passage actually tells us that the Galatians had a Gospel account in their possession, no doubt given to them by Paul, which is assuredly the Gospel we now know as Luke, being quoted from and expounded in 1Cor 11:23-26, 1Cor 14:37-38, and on through 1Cor 15:1-6. This is why Paul says to the Galatians:

Galatians 3:1
1 ω ανοητοι γαλαται τις υμας εβασκανεν οις κατ οφθαλμους ιησους χριστος προεγραφη εσταυρωμενος

προεγραφη = written before(hand)

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries
G4270 προγράφω prographo (pro-gra'-fō) v.
1. to write previously.
2. (figuratively) to announce, prescribe.
[from G4253 and G1125]
KJV: before ordain, evidently set forth, write (afore, aforetime)
Root(s): G4253, G1125

Paul is reminding the Galatians of a literal Gospel account which they had received from him. The Galatians were not at Golgotha to have seen the crucifixion for themselves, with their own eyes: that rather came by the message and the Gospel account which Paul had delivered unto them.

Galatians 3:1 LSV (Literal Standard Version)
1 O thoughtless Galatians, who bewitched you, not to obey the truth—before whose eyes [it] was previously written [about] Jesus Christ having been crucified?

They had received and had read/studied the writing, a Gospel account full of the Testimony of the Master, ("Paul's Gospel", a.k.a. "Luke"), and thus he says in the above statement, "before whose eyes it was previously written". And if testimony is spirit, and it is, (whether for the good or whether for the evil), then this is where they had received the Spirit because the Testimony of the Meshiah in the Gospel accounts, (John 6:63), is the new Spirit of the new-renewed covenant, (Eze 11 :19-20, Eze 36:26-27).

Luke was not one of the 12 apostles of Jesus.

 

[dak]

Luke was not one of the 12 apostles of Jesus.

Agreed, and neither was Paul one of the twelve.

 

[Hiddenthings]

One must ignore the Testimony of the Master in Luke 12 to believe what you have chosen to believe:

Or as I've intimated your understanding of Luke 12 is incorrect. On this subject Paul & John (Revelation via Christ) are in line with Christ's teaching in his ministry.,

and yet you still choose to ignore the plain clear statement when it has been posted, quoted, and shown to you three times now.

Not ignore - you sound dramatic! I asked you are question and you answered it.

No it isn't: it is found in carnal misrepresentations of Paul's writings in your favorite Bible translations so that you need not study the original languages for yourself.

Paul writings are extremely clear dak.

But somehow the Word in Luke 12 does not apply to your dogma?

No, I've asked if you want to consider it further and for some reason you are full of accusations today - did you get a good night sleep?

That's forked-tongue theology-speak: two horns like a lamb but speaks like a dragon.

Boy you are on fire today dak!

Truth is gained through a process of sidelining and ignoring the Testimony of the Son of Elohim? Pitting scripture against scripture to justify your beliefs? No, reconciling what appear on the surface to be contradictions is how we find out why we are wrong in any given situation, and again, Paul is not contradicting the Testimony of the Master: it is your understanding of certain Pauline statements that cause the contradiction(s).

If I removed the accusations from this reply, it leaves little to no spiritual substance.

Let's look at this subject a little closer with clearer heads!

 

[Hiddenthings]

@dak

35 “Stay dressed for action and keep your lamps burning, 36 and be like men who are waiting for their master to come home from the wedding feast, so that they may open the door to him at once when he comes and knocks. 37 Blessed are those servants whom the master finds awake when he comes. Truly, I say to you, he will dress himself for service and have them recline at table, and he will come and serve them. 38 If he comes in the second watch, or in the third, and finds them awake, blessed are those servants! 39 But know this, that if the master of the house had known at what hour the thief was coming, he would not have left his house to be broken into. 40 You also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.” Lk 12:35–40.

The first point which is interesting is the identity of the marriage is not given only that is a wedding the Master was invited to.

What is plainly clear is this is not "the" marriage supper between Christ and his bride!

Three clear and obvious reasons are given:

1. Their Lord is there as a guest, not the bridegroom
2. His return is after the wedding is over (big problem here dak!)
3. His servants are not involved in the wedding (even bigger problem!)

The Context is the true servants fulfill Revelation 19:7-9 which happens after he returns!

"His Wife Has Made Herself Ready" (Revelation 19:7–9)

This work is implied by those servants in Luke 12 who have kept the house with order and not unlike the virgins who have kept their lamps full.

The teachings of the apostle Paul in Ephesians 5:22–32 will have been fulfilled in their lives. At that time, they will be one with their Lord mentally, morally, and physically, a “glorious ecclesia, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing.”

Christ's standards for His bride are the only foundation for a successful, harmonious, and fruitful marriage as seen here:

1. Chastity and sanctification – as seen in 2 Corinthians 11:1–2 and Ephesians 5:26–27. (@dak we have looked at this already!)
2. Compatibility – mental, moral, and physical alignment.

Points 1&2 are set against the reality that "the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" not that they have missed the marriage as you may imply.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@dak

It’s interesting to observe the teaching method the Master uses here, he chooses a wedding setting, specifically because of its unpredictably long duration. In those days, it was customary for weddings to last several days, often with no fixed end time. This cultural context provides the perfect backdrop to illustrate the delay in his coming for his wedding. The extended and uncertain timeline of the celebration mirrors the waiting period for the return of the Bridegroom.

 

[dak]

Or as I've intimated your understanding of Luke 12 is incorrect. On this subject Paul & John (Revelation via Christ) are in line with Christ's teaching in his ministry.,

Why do you offer no evidence from the scripture for your claims? Put forth your interpretation of the words in Luke 12:36 and anywhere else therein from which I quoted and prove that you are correct according to the scripture. Put forth the rest of your evidence for the other claim, ("on this subject Paul & John (Revelation via Christ) are in line with Christ's teaching in his ministry."). No wonder you have refused to accept the plain words of the Master right from my first post to you on this subject: your theory was blown out of the water from the start.

You've had several days and you have done no such thing, so here it is again for the fourth time: prove why I am wrong, (according to you), for simply believing what it says.

Luke 12:35-36 KJV
35 Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning;
36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.

Quote the scripture or scriptures in their contexts which prove me wrong and expound them.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@dak

Notice this in Luke 12:36, Jesus instructs His followers to be “like men who wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he comes and knocks, they may open to him immediately.”

However this urgency is echoed in Revelation 3:20, where the Lord appeals to the complacent Laodicean ecclesia:

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.”

He is knocking, but will they respond in time?

In contrast, Song of Solomon 5:2–6 gives a sobering picture of delayed response. The bridegroom comes knocking, but the bride hesitates:

Verse 2: “I sleep, but my heart waketh: it is the voice of my beloved that knocketh, saying, Open to me, my sister, my love, my dove, my undefiled...”
Verse 3: “I have put off my coat; how shall I put it on? I have washed my feet; how shall I defile them?”
Verse 4: “My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.”
Verse 5: “I rose up to open to my beloved... my hands dropped with myrrh...”
Verse 6: “I opened to my beloved; but my beloved had withdrawn himself, and was gone...”

By the time she rises to open the door, he is no longer there.

The opportunity is lost.

Luke 12 is the event proceeding the Lords return and his subsequent Marriage and the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Why do you offer no evidence from the scripture for your claims? Put forth your interpretation of the words in Luke 12:36 and anywhere else therein from which I quoted and prove that you are correct according to the scripture. Put forth the rest of your evidence for the other claim, ("on this subject Paul & John (Revelation via Christ) are in line with Christ's teaching in his ministry."). No wonder you have refused to accept the plain words of the Master right from my first post to you on this subject: your theory was blown out of the water from the start.

You've had several days and you have done no such thing, so here it is again for the fourth time: prove why I am wrong, (according to you), for simply believing what it says.

Luke 12:35-36 KJV
35 Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning;
36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.

Quote the scripture or scriptures in their contexts which prove me wrong and expound them.

I've already replied to this dak - I'll wait for you to catch up!

 

[dak]

The first point which is interesting is the identity of the marriage is not given only that is a wedding the Master was invited to.

???

What is plainly clear is this is not "the" marriage supper between Christ and his bride!

That's not an explanation or proof: that's an empty claim without scripture evidence.

Three clear and obvious reasons are given:

1. Their Lord is there as a guest, not the bridegroom

Where is that found in the text? Please point it out for me.

2. His return is after the wedding is over (big problem here dak!)

Not once you realize you are neither the bride nor the covenant.

3. His servants are not involved in the wedding (even bigger problem!)

Same problem for you also in the parable of the ten virgins and several other places.

Matthew 25:1-12 ASV
1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, who took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
2 And five of them were foolish, and five were wise.
3 For the foolish, when they took their lamps, took no oil with them:
4 but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5 Now while the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
6 But at midnight there is a cry, Behold, the bridegroom! Come ye forth to meet him.
7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are going out.
9 But the wise answered, saying, Peradventure there will not be enough for us and you: go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
10 And while they went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast: and the door was shut.
11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.

They are invited to the wedding feast, not the wedding itself.

Matthew 9:15 ASV
15 And Jesus said unto them, Can the sons of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then will they fast.

Mark 2:19-20 ASV
19 And Jesus said unto them, Can the sons of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast.
20 But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then will they fast in that day.

The bridegroom is taken from the sons of the bridechamber for a time: then shall they fast, (waiting for their Master to return from the wedding).

The Context is the true servants fulfill Revelation 19:7-9 which happens after he returns!

More speculation.

"His Wife Has Made Herself Ready" (Revelation 19:7–9)

As already shown, that is a city, New Yerushalem, and the women are the cities are the covenants, (Gal 4).

The teachings of the apostle Paul in Ephesians 5:22–32 will have been fulfilled in their lives. At that time, they will be one with their Lord mentally, morally, and physically, a “glorious ecclesia, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing.”

We've already been over that and you were not able to refute what was shown.

Christ's standards for His bride are the only foundation for a successful, harmonious, and fruitful marriage as seen here:

1. Chastity and sanctification – as seen in 2 Corinthians 11:1–2 and Ephesians 5:26–27. (@dak we have looked at this already!)
2. Compatibility – mental, moral, and physical alignment.

When are you going to realize that natural minded understandings of the scripture lead to death? (Rom 8:5-13).

Read the following with your natural mind and see where it gets you:

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 ASV
34 let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law.
35 And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church.

1 Timothy 2:11-15 ASV
11 Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection.
12 But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve;
14 and Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression:
15 but she shall be saved through her child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety.

Points 1&2 are set against the reality that "the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" not that they have missed the marriage as you may imply.

See Matthew 25:1-12, Matthew 9:15, and Mark 2:19-20 above herein.

 

[Hiddenthings]

???

???

That's not an explanation or proof: that's an empty claim without scripture evidence.

The burden of proof is on you to show the wedding the Lord attended was his. Context suggests a reason for delay - I know you can see this dak!

Where is that found in the text? Please point it out for me.

The context is a delay dak...surely you can read the Masters words for yourself and interpret a viable reason for him to be delayed?

Not once you realize you are neither the bride nor the covenant.

You have your timing all out dak....surely you must be able to realise that?

Same problem for you also in the parable of the ten virgins and several other places.

Matthew 25:1-12 ASV
1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, who took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
2 And five of them were foolish, and five were wise.
3 For the foolish, when they took their lamps, took no oil with them:
4 but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5 Now while the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
6 But at midnight there is a cry, Behold, the bridegroom! Come ye forth to meet him.
7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are going out.
9 But the wise answered, saying, Peradventure there will not be enough for us and you: go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
10 And while they went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast: and the door was shut.
11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.

They are invited to the wedding feast, not the wedding itself.

“With Him to the Marriage” The RSV and Rotherham translations render this as “the marriage feast” highlighting that the faithful are not merely attending as guests, but are participants in the bridal party itself! As seen in Revelation 19:9:

“Blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb.”

Matthew 9:15 ASV
15 And Jesus said unto them, Can the sons of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then will they fast.

Mark 2:19-20 ASV
19 And Jesus said unto them, Can the sons of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. 20 But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then will they fast in that day.

The bridegroom is taken from the sons of the bridechamber for a time: then shall they fast, (waiting for their Master to return from the wedding).

I have no issue with the above dak. The Lord will return to gather his bride.

More speculation.

Couldn't deal with Revelation 19:7-9?

As already shown, that is a city, New Yerushalem, and the women are the cities are the covenants, (Gal 4).

You need to start a separate thread on how you interpret the allegory!

We've already been over that and you were not able to refute what was shown.

This still stands "The teachings of the apostle Paul in Ephesians 5:22–32 will have been fulfilled in their lives. At that time, they will be one with their Lord mentally, morally, and physically, a “glorious ecclesia, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing.”

When are you going to realize that natural minded understandings of the scripture lead to death? (Rom 8:5-13).

Where did that come from? Because you can't understand 2 Corinthians 11:1–2 and Ephesians 5:26–27 I'm natural minded?

Cast stones elsewhere dak - if you can't eloquently communicate what it is you believe that doesn't fall on me!

See Matthew 25:1-12, Matthew 9:15, and Mark 2:19-20 above herein.

A weak response overall.

You couldn't even enter the Lord's teaching in Luke 12 - loads of resisting and no exposition.

Three clear and obvious reasons are given:

Three point for now still apply!

1. Their Lord is there as a guest, not the bridegroom
2. His return is after the wedding is over (big problem here dak!)
3. His servants are not involved in the wedding (even bigger problem!)

 

[Hiddenthings]

@dak

It’s interesting to observe the teaching method the Master uses here, he chooses a wedding setting, specifically because of its unpredictably long duration. In those days, it was customary for weddings to last several days, often with no fixed end time. This cultural context provides the perfect backdrop to illustrate the delay in his coming for his wedding. The extended and uncertain timeline of the celebration mirrors the waiting period for the return of the Bridegroom.

This is the correct context @dak which you need to deal with and not avoid.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@dak

From my perspective, it seems you have a knowledge gap regarding the Marriage of the Lamb and the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, which are two distinct events.

 

[dak]

This is the correct context @dak which you need to deal with and not avoid.

Ignoring your twisting of the scripture is not avoiding the truth which is actually in the scripture: the passage does not say what you say it says, for you wrote, "This cultural context provides the perfect backdrop to illustrate the delay in his coming for his wedding."

Show me where it says that. It doesn't, and here it is again for the fifth time now:

Luke 12:35-36 KJV
35 Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning;
36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.

How does "when he will RETURN FROM the wedding" suddenly become "his coming for his wedding" in your mind??? It is the same with most all of your reasoning: it is mostly based on your assumptions from reading into the text what is not there. I am seriously losing interest in discussions with you because you are not being honest about things written in the scripture; it's as if you are just appropriating whatever passages suit your needs and changing what they say to give some sort of credibility to the abundance of false claims you keep making everywhere. There are times when difficult words may not be rendered as perfectly as they could have been, but this is not one of those times. The phrase coming for his wedding is just about the complete opposite of returning from his wedding.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Ignoring your twisting of the scripture is not avoiding the truth which is actually in the scripture: the passage does not say what you say it says, for you wrote, "This cultural context provides the perfect backdrop to illustrate the delay in his coming for his wedding."

Show me where it says that. It doesn't, and here it is again for the fifth time now:

Luke 12:35-36 KJV
35 Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning;
36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.

How does "when he will RETURN FROM the wedding" suddenly become "his coming for his wedding" in your mind??? It is the same with most all of your reasoning: it is mostly based on your assumptions from reading into the text what is not there. I am seriously losing interest in discussions with you because you are not being honest about things written in the scripture; it's as if you are just appropriating whatever passages suit your needs and changing what they say to give some sort of credibility to the abundance of false claims you keep making everywhere. There are times when difficult words may not be rendered as perfectly as they could have been, but this is not one of those times. The phrase coming for his wedding is just about the complete opposite of returning from his wedding.

Here are the facts:

1. You cannot prove from the text that Christ was at His own wedding.
2. I cannot prove from the text that Christ was using the wedding as a reason for the delay to his own! but the text does clearly present the wedding as the reason for the master's delay.

Interestingly, you don't highlight the phrase: "that when he cometh and knocketh, they (bride in waiting) may open unto him immediately" which seems quite central to the point being made.

To be honest, I’m starting to lose interest, mainly due to your unwillingness to clearly define what you believe. You also make far too many assumptions about the text without taking the time to consider the context of the Master's teaching.

Just to check that I'm not going crazy over this and the context appears obvious I check some others work to see if logic prevails.

A wedding banquet. In this parable the banquet is not the wedding supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:7–9) because the “Master” returns to his servants after the feast.

Robert H. Stein, Luke vol. 24 of The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 360.

Well to me this is captain obvious!

The Master is away celebrating. Wedding celebrations may last four to seven days. Matters not how long. When he returns, he does not want to have to rouse you from your bed to open the door. He wants you at the door ready to open and to carry out the tasks he has planned for you.

Trent C. Butler, Luke, vol. 3 of Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000), 207.

Again, fairly obvious

Firstly, what this tells me dak is I'm not alone in seeing the obvious - comforting to know I'm not doing as you said.

Here is a writer who held doubts!

They were waiting to join the marriage procession, these, to receive their lord, on his return to his own house. The only question of doubt is, whether the lord referred to here, was the bridegroom himself returning in marriage procession to the house of his father, or some friend of the bridegroom returning to his own home, after attending upon the marriage festivity of his friend

John J. Owen, Commentary on Luke (New York: John F. Trow, 1859), 183.

Now if you are able with clarity explain what you believe this means I'm all ears but so far you posts have been terribly vague!

 

[Hiddenthings]

How does "when he will RETURN FROM the wedding" suddenly become "his coming for his wedding" in your mind???

I'm not sure that you understand the feast takes place after the wedding and not before. If Christ's wedding has happened what of his servants?

 

[Hiddenthings]

LEXICON—a. γάμος (LN 34.68) (BAGD 1.b. p. 151): ‘wedding feast’ [BECNT; CEV, NASB, NLT, TEV], ‘marriage feast’ [NTC], ‘wedding banquet’ [BAGD; HCSB, NIV, NRSV], ‘wedding party’ [AB; NCV, REB], ‘wedding celebration’ [Arn; NET], ‘wedding’ [LN, Lns; GW, KJV], ‘banquet’ [WBC].

This plural form of the noun was commonly used for a single celebration.

What were the disciples to be waiting for? Addressed directly to the disciples, it is already apparent that the parable is about their Lord’s return after he leaves them. They were to be ready for the return of Jesus (Luke 12:40) his return from heaven, the second coming, the coming of the Son of Man.

Some refer the wedding feast in the story to the eschatological banquet, the marriage supper of the Lamb when Jesus ascended to heaven after his death. Others think that the wedding feast is just a descriptive detail without any reference to the eschatological messianic banquet.

This would not be marriage supper of the Lamb, since the master does not return to his servants until after the feast. Or, this was addressed to people in general, telling them to be ready for a crisis in which they would called to account to God concerning their responsibilities.

What is meant by γάμος ‘wedding feast’?

1. This would be some friend’s wedding, not the master’s. Or, the master was the groom who had been to a supper with his friends. At that time wedding celebrations could last for seven days and so the time of the master’s return was not known.

2. This refers to some feast, not necessarily connected with a wedding. In the plural, it refers to a party or banquet.

Why would their master want a group of servants ready to open the door at his coming? An ordinary man would need just one man to open the door, but the master had a palace and when he returned with many others accompanying him, the master wanted his many slaves to be ready to receive the group with great ceremony.

 

[Hiddenthings]

In conclusion to this section on Luke 12:

The key point is that the master leaves his house to attend a wedding, while the servants remain behind. As servants, they wouldn’t have been invited to the celebration, but they wait with joy and anticipation. They’re not idle or treating the time as a break, instead, they stay alert and busy themselves with preparation, eagerly looking forward to the master's return. When he comes back with his bride, they are ready and waiting, eager to serve both with gladness and honour.

While @dak is caught up in the sideshow, the real twist in the parable comes in the following verse. Rather than the master returning to be served, verse 37 reveals that he puts on servant’s clothes and serves those who were ready and waiting for him.

"Shall gird himself" What a remarkable act of humility in rewarding faithful service! So unlike earthly masters, as seen in Luke 17:7–8.

Luke 17:7–8 “Will any one of you who has a servant plowing or keeping sheep say to him when he has come in from the field, ‘Come at once and recline at table’? 8 Will he not rather say to him, ‘Prepare supper for me, and dress properly, and serve me while I eat and drink, and afterward you will eat and drink’?

The focus of the parable isn’t on the event the master was away for, but on what the servants were doing during his absence.

 

[dak]

In conclusion to this section on Luke 12:

The key point is that the master leaves his house to attend a wedding, while the servants remain behind. As servants, they wouldn’t have been invited to the celebration, but they wait with joy and anticipation. They’re not idle or treating the time as a break, instead, they stay alert and busy themselves with preparation, eagerly looking forward to the master's return. When he comes back with his bride, they are ready and waiting, eager to serve both with gladness and honour.

While @dak is caught up in the sideshow, the real twist in the parable comes in the following verse. Rather than the master returning to be served, verse 37 reveals that he puts on servant’s clothes and serves those who were ready and waiting for him.

"Shall gird himself" What a remarkable act of humility in rewarding faithful service! So unlike earthly masters, as seen in Luke 17:7–8.

Luke 17:7–8 “Will any one of you who has a servant plowing or keeping sheep say to him when he has come in from the field, ‘Come at once and recline at table’? 8 Will he not rather say to him, ‘Prepare supper for me, and dress properly, and serve me while I eat and drink, and afterward you will eat and drink’?

The focus of the parable isn’t on the event the master was away for, but on what the servants were doing during his absence.

Apparently you still haven't figured out why I posted so much from Luke 12. The response above is scripture negligence at best. There are certain key phrases that serve to link companion passages together, which makes it much easier to find them with modern search tools, and they are there to highlight background context or companion passages that speak of the same things, and often times those companion passages have more information on the same topic.

Luke 12:43 KJV
41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

Matthew 24:42-51 KJV
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Will you now say that the Master does not speak of himself in this which is the same exact context? And of course the close of Matthew 24, (being part of the Olivet Discourse), points the astute reader to the close of Mark 13.

Mark 13:31-37 KJV
31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.
34 For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.
35 Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning: [parable of the ten virgins]
36 Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. [parable of the ten virgins]
37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

Please feel free to explain how the Master is not actually speaking of himself in these texts; which are companion texts with the Luke passage. This why I see no further need to respond to the rest of your commentary. It's pretty much an exercise in futility, for the premises of your arguments have already been refuted, and yet you keep doubling down on futility rather than simply accepting what the passages quoted actually say.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Apparently you still haven't figured out why I posted so much from Luke 12. The response above is scripture negligence at best. There are certain key phrases that serve to link companion passages together, which makes it much easier to find them with modern search tools, and they are there to highlight background context or companion passages that speak of the same things, and often times those companion passages have more information on the same topic.

A lot of words which actually say very little. Certainly nothing in there which relates to Luke 12.

Luke 12:43 KJV
41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

Do you think by highlighting the text blue it will magically take on new meaning? Red is the context without doubt!

Matthew 24:42-51 KJV
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Will you now say that the Master does not speak of himself in this which is the same exact context? And of course the close of Matthew 24, (being part of the Olivet Discourse), points the astute reader to the close of Mark 13.

Again, red text is the Context of Luke 12:35-36 - Marriage and Supper follow Judgement of the House.

Mark 13:31-37 KJV
31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.
34 For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.
35 Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning: [parable of the ten virgins]
36 Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. [parable of the ten virgins]
37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

Please feel free to explain how the Master is not actually speaking of himself in these texts; which are companion texts with the Luke passage. This why I see no further need to respond to the rest of your commentary. It's pretty much an exercise in futility, for the premises of your arguments have already been refuted, and yet you keep doubling down on futility rather than simply accepting what the passages quoted actually say.

Again red text supports the correct interpretation of Luke 12:35-36.

Interesting how Jesus uses a marriage and a far country to provide the reason for his delay.

In this instance the far country is heaven John 14:13; 16:7. Just as in type Moses went up to Sinai to receive the pattern of the Tabernacle Ex 24:14-18. Christ will return with New Jerusalem and the reward for all those who are born from above!

No marriage happened in Heaven as this will happen when he returns gathers and raises the Elect etc.