Matthew 13:24....the world, or the church?

[Mathew Ward]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it? 

 

[Mathew Ward]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it?

So which ones are part of THE church?

How do you tell the ones that are part of THE church?

Are there folks that you might classify as part of THE church that are not?

Why can't you see that distinction?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it?

So which ones are part of THE church?

How do you tell the ones that are part of THE church?

Are there folks that you might classify as part of THE church that are not?

Why can't you see that distinction?

What part of called out ones are you having trouble understanding?  What part of local assembly of believers and non-believers vs. THE CHURCH are you having trouble understanding? 

 

[Mathew Ward]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it?

So which ones are part of THE church?

How do you tell the ones that are part of THE church?

Are there folks that you might classify as part of THE church that are not?

Why can't you see that distinction?

What part of called out ones are you having trouble understanding?  What part of local assembly of believers and non-believers vs. THE CHURCH are you having trouble understanding?

I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Why are you having trouble making that distinction?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it?

So which ones are part of THE church?

How do you tell the ones that are part of THE church?

Are there folks that you might classify as part of THE church that are not?

Why can't you see that distinction?

What part of called out ones are you having trouble understanding?  What part of local assembly of believers and non-believers vs. THE CHURCH are you having trouble understanding?

I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Why are you having trouble making that distinction?

Where is the distinction between a local assembly of believers/non-believers and a local assembly of believers/non-believers at a movie theater watching Guardians of the Galaxy?  Why would there be an application of the parable for one and not the other? 

Given that there is no distinction, that both are just microcosms of the world, I must ask you again, what exactly have you elucidated with your hermeneutics that was not already made clear by saying the field is the world? 

 

[Mathew Ward]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it?

So which ones are part of THE church?

How do you tell the ones that are part of THE church?

Are there folks that you might classify as part of THE church that are not?

Why can't you see that distinction?

What part of called out ones are you having trouble understanding?  What part of local assembly of believers and non-believers vs. THE CHURCH are you having trouble understanding?

I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Why are you having trouble making that distinction?

Where is the distinction between a local assembly of believers/non-believers and a local assembly of believers/non-believers at a movie theater watching Guardians of the Galaxy?  Why would there be an application of the parable for one and not the other? 

Given that there is no distinction, that both are just microcosms of the world, I must ask you again, what exactly have you elucidated with your hermeneutics that was not already made clear by saying the field is the world?

You keep telling me the church is the called out ones.


So I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Which ones are not the called out that you assemble with?

How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it?

So which ones are part of THE church?

How do you tell the ones that are part of THE church?

Are there folks that you might classify as part of THE church that are not?

Why can't you see that distinction?

What part of called out ones are you having trouble understanding?  What part of local assembly of believers and non-believers vs. THE CHURCH are you having trouble understanding?

I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Why are you having trouble making that distinction?

Where is the distinction between a local assembly of believers/non-believers and a local assembly of believers/non-believers at a movie theater watching Guardians of the Galaxy?  Why would there be an application of the parable for one and not the other? 

Given that there is no distinction, that both are just microcosms of the world, I must ask you again, what exactly have you elucidated with your hermeneutics that was not already made clear by saying the field is the world?

You keep telling me the church is the called out ones.


So I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Which ones are not the called out that you assemble with?

How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

What's the current price of tea in China? 

And why can't you answer my question, what exactly have you elucidated with your hermeneutics that was not already made clear by saying the field is the world?

 

[Mathew Ward]

didn't say the interpretation was the church I said it was a plausible application of the truth.

So the church has no way to sort out false Christians from its midst, and it's just supposed to wait for God to do it at the end of days?

Did anyone make Paul aware of this "application" before he told the Corinthians to get rid of the guy who was shtupping his mother?

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

There are no non-Christians in the church.  That's the point we keep trying to make.

So at the local assembly that you attend (which YOU call church, but is not THE church) there are no non-Christians that are a part of that assembly?

See what I did there?  Do you understand the distinction that you just made?  Why don't you understand that distinction when we make it?

So which ones are part of THE church?

How do you tell the ones that are part of THE church?

Are there folks that you might classify as part of THE church that are not?

Why can't you see that distinction?

What part of called out ones are you having trouble understanding?  What part of local assembly of believers and non-believers vs. THE CHURCH are you having trouble understanding?

I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Why are you having trouble making that distinction?

Where is the distinction between a local assembly of believers/non-believers and a local assembly of believers/non-believers at a movie theater watching Guardians of the Galaxy?  Why would there be an application of the parable for one and not the other? 

Given that there is no distinction, that both are just microcosms of the world, I must ask you again, what exactly have you elucidated with your hermeneutics that was not already made clear by saying the field is the world?

You keep telling me the church is the called out ones.


So I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Which ones are not the called out that you assemble with?

How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

What's the current price of tea in China? 

And why can't you answer my question, what exactly have you elucidated with your hermeneutics that was not already made clear by saying the field is the world?

I've answered that before, but somehow you don't like the answer.

But if you would answer some simple questions...



You keep telling me the church is the called out ones.


So I keep asking you who are these called out ones?

Which called out ones are the ones that you assemble with?

Which ones are not the called out that you assemble with?

How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Mathew Ward]How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?[/quote]

That's far,  far,  far above my pay grade.  When my death atones for the sins of humanity, I'll be in a better position to answer this question.

 

[Mathew Ward]

[quote author=Mathew Ward]How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

That's far,  far,  far above my pay grade.  When my death atones for the sins of humanity, I'll be in a better position to answer this question.
[/quote]

Oh, so this parable does have application to the church. Thanks for answering.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

[quote author=Mathew Ward]How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

That's far,  far,  far above my pay grade.  When my death atones for the sins of humanity, I'll be in a better position to answer this question.
[/quote]

It's irrelevant anyway.  He's just looking for a way to equate "church" with "local assembly", via the explanation that we can't tell who is and who isn't called out.  It's a twisted way to make his worthless hermeneutics seem useful. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I've answered that before, but somehow you don't like the answer.

No, your answer was wrong.  You said "church" when you meant "local assembly".  We have demonstrated beyond question that the two are not synonymous. 

So given that the local assembly is just a microcosm of the world, what exactly have you elucidated with your hermeneutics that was not already made clear by saying the field is the world?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Mathew Ward]How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

That's far,  far,  far above my pay grade.  When my death atones for the sins of humanity, I'll be in a better position to answer this question.

Oh, so this parable does have application to the church. Thanks for answering.
[/quote]

Sure,  it has application.  The church is not to be in the business of pulling tares out of the wheat in the field. In no way whatsoever does that mean the church is the field.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

[quote author=Mathew Ward]How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

That's far,  far,  far above my pay grade.  When my death atones for the sins of humanity, I'll be in a better position to answer this question.

Oh, so this parable does have application to the church. Thanks for answering.
[/quote]

After all this, you still don't understand the difference between a local assembly and the church?  Are you really that dull? 

 

[Mathew Ward]

[quote author=Mathew Ward]How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

That's far,  far,  far above my pay grade.  When my death atones for the sins of humanity, I'll be in a better position to answer this question.

It's irrelevant anyway.  He's just looking for a way to equate "church" with "local assembly", via the explanation that we can't tell who is and who isn't called out.  It's a twisted way to make his worthless hermeneutics seem useful.
[/quote]

Yeah the difference between the called out and those not called out is irrelevant. 

Yeah interpreting and applying the Bible is worthless too. 

Maybe you can teach those you assemble with these "great truths of yours" next time you gathered.

 

[Mathew Ward]

[quote author=Mathew Ward]How do you tell the difference between the called out and those not called out?

That's far,  far,  far above my pay grade.  When my death atones for the sins of humanity, I'll be in a better position to answer this question.

Oh, so this parable does have application to the church. Thanks for answering.

Sure,  it has application.  The church is not to be in the business of pulling tares out of the wheat in the field. In no way whatsoever does that mean the church is the field.
[/quote]

I've never said the church was the field. The Tomato wants me to have that position, but it is not one I hold to.

If we are not making application of the truth we have, then it would seem we would become prideful with all the knowledge we accumulate.

 

[Ransom]

So those are the only non Christians in the church, those that are "shtupping his mother"?

Is that really your position?

No, that's your intentional misrepresentation of my position.

If the field is the church, then Jesus is teaching his disciples that they should let God sort out the wheat from the tares at the end of days. Was Paul disobeying when he told the Corinthians to purge the immoral people from the congregation immediately?

 

[ALAYMAN]

If the field is the church, then Jesus is teaching his disciples that they should let God sort out the wheat from the tares at the end of days. Was Paul disobeying when he told the Corinthians to purge the immoral people from the congregation immediately?

The usual understanding of the position that says the church is in view in the parable would mean that while the darnels are seemingly identical (frauds and hypocrites) we should be patient.  And in due time, they will become apparent that they are not of us, which would allow for Matthew 18 to be used.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=ALAYMAN]The usual understanding of the position that says the church is in view in the parable...[/quote]

...ignores the explanation offered by Jesus.