Let Both Grow Together, Part II

Before I dive into Jesus’ interpretation of the parable of the weeds, I want to introduce a concept that rumbles underneath the context. What I am referring to is a big word called eschatology, which means the study of the end times or last things.  It is my contention that Jesus touches upon this subject with respect to his parable of the weeds and its counterpart called the parable of the dragnet.  Both of these parables present the end times in very broad strokes, which is another way of saying that they depict the big picture view of eschatology.  Later on in Matthew’s gospel, the writer presents Jesus’ most detailed account of the end times known as the Olivet Discourse.  Here is the main point.  Jesus uses the parables of the weeds and the dragnet to demonstrate his Messianic role in carrying out the last things.  I will not cover the dragnet parable until later on in the series.  The following is Matthew’s account of Christ’s interpretation of the parable of the weeds:

“Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, ‘Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.’  He answered, ‘The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.  The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom.  The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil.  The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels.  Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age.  The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.  Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear'” (Matt. 13:36-43, ESV).

Right away, there is one obvious observation to make about the parable of the weeds.  Jesus interprets it for the disciples in response to their question.  There is something valuable about asking questions.  The following modern-day expression describes the disciples: “The only dumb question is the one you don’t ask.”  I do not know for certain if a similar saying existed in First Century Israel.  Regardless, the disciples overcame any misgivings about asking the Lord to explain the parable of the weeds.  The principle is a basic one.  If I do not understand a concept or a lesson, then I need to speak up.  If I remain silent about it, this does not remove my responsibility for correctly understanding and applying the lesson.  I think the disciples understood this principle or something like it.

Moving on to the passage…it is even clearer in Jesus’ interpretation of the parable of the weeds that the final judgment is in view.  According to the Lord, the Son of Man orchestrates this glorious and dreadful day.  The Jewish people in Jesus’ day had some idea about the Son of Man.  In fact, the religious leaders knew that this title referred to the Messiah and his coming to set up his kingdom on the earth.  This remained their expectation and even the disciples right up through Christ’s ascension (Luke 17:20-21 and Acts 1:6, ESV).  Where did they get these ideas?  When Jesus taught these parables, the Old Testament was the only bible in existence.  There was no New Testament.  Christ taught from the Old Testament scriptures and constantly demonstrated how they reflected his real identity (John 5:39, ESV).

What this means is that Jesus draws from the Old Testament as he interprets the parable of the weeds.  The title of Son of Man occurs in two prophetic books of the Old Testament: Ezekiel and Daniel.  The former book speaks to the sufferings of the Son of Man during his first coming.  It is in Daniel chapter seven where the prophet depicts the Son of Man and his Messianic kingdom overthrowing the kingdoms of the world (Daniel 7:13-14, ESV).  Jesus knows this section of Old Testament prophecy and references it precisely because of its content and theme.  Both of these fit well with the parable of the weeds.  Now, the apostle John expands upon Daniel’s vision in the book of Revelation, specifically in chapter nineteen.  It is here that the apostle illustrates the Messiah’s second coming and his crushing defeat of the Beast, the False Prophet and their armies.

It is important to realize that the Messiah brings in the fullness of his kingdom at his second advent.  This lies in the background of the parable of the weeds, which rests in part on Daniel’s Messianic prophecy found in the seventh chapter.  The other important point to realize is that the present, spiritual kingdom inaugurates the Messiah’s reign and subsequent separation of the just and the unjust.  Even if the distinction between the two is not always apparent, the coming of the Son of Man will show the greatness of the disparity between the sons of the kingdom and the sons of the evil one (Revelation 20:11-15, ESV).  The former face a glorious future where they will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father (Daniel 12:3 and Matt. 13:43, ESV).  The latter are on a collision course to spend eternity in the fiery furnace where there is wheeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 13:42, ESV).

Jesus uses the image of the fiery furnace to stand in for the lake of fire.  The latter comes from the book of Revelation, which depicts the final end of the wicked (Rev. 19:20; 20:10, 14-15, ESV).  Both the fiery furnace and the lake of fire are metaphors for hell.  It is an unpleasant subject to bring up.  Some today attempt to redefine the nature of hell in order to lessen its sheer unpleasantness.  I think that is immoral on the part of those teachers and ministers in the church.  Hell should unsettle me.  It should be unpleasant because that is what it is at the core.  There is something downright dreadful about being cast off by God for eternity.  This is what awaits anyone who rejects Christ and his word.  Here is the hope: until the Son of Man returns a second time, today is the day of salvation.

The Oranje, Hotels in Rio de Janeiro, and FIFA Dignitaries

Nearly every nation in the world lives for the glory of the World Cup tournament.  Some countries relish the opportunity of simply qualifying for it let alone winning it all.  The actual tournament spans one month.  Each team develops a routine or rhythm away from their native land unless they happen to be the tournament’s host.  A good friend of mine runs a blog about his experiences as an independent producer and director.  Earlier today, he notified me of some funky FIFA business involving the Netherlands national team (aka The Oranje) and their hotel accommodations in Rio de Janeiro.  Here is one of the many reports on FIFA booting The Oranje from their hotel on the eve of their semifinal match against Argentina.

Some of the news pieces like the one that I referred attempt to play it fair with FIFA and the situation.  Yours truly knows how to read between the lines.  I think it reflects poorly on the governing body of the world’s greatest sport during its greatest venue.  Is this adversity for The Oranje and their coach Louis Van Gaal?  I think the answer is a resounding yes.  This has the potential to disrupt the team’s rhythm at a crucial juncture in the tournament.  Now, did The Oranje know beforehand that FIFA bigwigs and VIPs would be staying at their hotel and in their rooms for the semifinal and final matches?  One could assume that The Oranje and their executive leadership knew that something could impact their stay.

Maybe the executive management for the Dutch national team planned their accommodations poorly after fielding several warnings from FIFA’s powerbrokers.  Despite the fact that The Oranje have earned a spot in the semifinals, their reward from FIFA is to change hotel accommodations near the end of the tournament.  If there is one thing that shines through this incident, it is the poor planning on the part of FIFA and not the Dutch.  This seems to be the sort of thing that one sorts out a few years in advance. When an organization like FIFA decides to wine and dine suitors and the like, I find it hard to swallow that this wasn’t ironed out earlier.  Did FIFA expect The Oranje to be out of the World Cup at this stage?  The Dutch team, like every other team in the World Cup, represents the sport’s governing body.  I wonder if there will be some friction between FIFA and The Oranje in the coming weeks and months.

Let Both Grow Together, Part I

Yesterday I paused from the current blog series on the kingdom parables of Matthew 13 due to the 4th of July holiday.  My wife and I drove to Santa Maria, CA to visit her parents for the weekend.  It is much quieter here than in Los Angeles.  America turned 238 years old, which is in teen years with respect to the Old World.  My first two posts of the series, here and here, deal with the introduction to this series and the parable of the sower.  Now, I plumb the depths of the parable of the weeds.  The following quoted text occurs after Jesus interpreted the parable of the sower for the disciples.  At this point in the gospel narrative, the audience is a mixed one:

“He put another parable before them, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away.  So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also.  And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field?  How then does it have weeds?’  He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’  So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’  But he said, ‘No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them.  Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn'” (Matt. 13:24-30, ESV).  

Let me draw my readers’ attentions to key observations about the text.  Notice in this parable that the enemy takes advantage of the situation to suit his own ends.  According to Jesus, the enemy plants weeds in the man’s field while his workers sleep through the evening (Matt. 13:25, ESV).  When the wheat starts producing the head of grain, then the workers discern the presence of the weeds in the field (Matt. 13:26-27, ESV).  Until this point, the workers believed that the whole field contained only wheat.  They were the ones who tilled the soil, sowed the seed, watered it, and fertilized it.  At least, they thought they were the only ones who had sowed in the field.  The last thing to key on is the wisdom of the man who owns the field.  Given his farming experience, he directs his workers against pulling up the weeds in order to preserve the wheat (Matt. 13:29, ESV).  He tells them that the reapers will sort out the weeds from the wheat during the harvest season (Matt. 13:30, ESV).

In the parable of the weeds, Jesus displays the openly subversive work of the enemy during the entire course of this age.  The evil one’s main goal is to corrupt the wheat harvest by overrunning it with weeds.  One might argue that his secondary goal is to elicit a response from the workers by distracting them from preserving the wheat through the effort of removing the weeds.  The wisdom of the landowner checks his workers’ instincts by redirecting their focus to the primary task of keeping the wheat until the harvest.  He does not fault his workers for sleeping on the job so to speak, which is what allows the enemy to do his work.  Now, I do not want to suggest that it is perfectly fine for God’s people to be spiritually asleep.  There are strong admonishments in the New Testament about waking up from a spiritual, slumbering condition (Romans 13:11-12 & Ephesians 5:11-14, ESV).  My point is that there is a rhythm to working and resting built into creation by the Lord.  Satan knows this rhythm and uses it to steal, kill, and destroy (John 10:10, ESV).

At this point, I want to say a word about the workers.  These people stand in for God’s people throughout the entire New Testament era.  We serve the Lord by working in his field.  Our task is clear: sow the seed and maintain the crop until harvest time.  In fact, those two points serve as the foundation for churches, ministries, and believers everywhere in the world.  At the end of Matthew’s gospel, our Lord no longer uses the seed sowing analogy, but plainly states that his disciples are to go and make disciples.  The wheat must produce more wheat.  This implies living fruitful lives.  The reason for the fruitfulness goes back to the parable of the sower where the seed is the word of the kingdom.  Life is in the word, which bears fruit in the life that receives it.  What this shows us is that seed sowing, or preaching the gospel, or bearing witness to others about Christ, must be every believers’ mission until he or she goes home to be with the Lord or the Messiah comes back.

Now the weeds represent those individuals who profess Christ, but who lack the inward life of the wheat and the corresponding ability to bear fruit.  These are the ones that Jesus mentions will not enter the kingdom of heaven despite telling him, “Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name” (Matt. 7:22, ESV)?   There are many who attend churches all over the United States and the world who believe that they are in good with the Lord.  Some of  these weeds may have grown up in the church, others serve here, there, and everywhere, but Jesus tells them on judgment day, “I never knew you; depart from me…” (Matt. 7:23, ESV).  In this present age, the weeds may go unrecognized by God’s people for a time or even all the way till death; however, they do not fool the Lord, who searches the hearts and tests the minds of men (Jeremiah 17:10, ESV). Do we believe that as true?

Here are some final exhortations to remember.  The church must be a faithful steward with the gospel mission.  The enemy will do his work, but our focus is to sow the Master’s good seed.  To state it another way, the church is neither a launching pad for heresy hunters nor is she to expend her energy removing the weeds from the kingdom in this age.  It will always be a mixture of good and bad by virtue of the landowner saying, “let both grow together until the harvest” (Matt. 13:30a).  In the second part of this post, I will proceed through our Lord’s interpretation of his parable of the weeds while drawing out some things about the eschaton or the time of the end.

 

Happy Birthday, America!

Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky is one of the world’s greatest composers while probably being Russia’s best.  His 1812 Overture is an absolute masterpiece.  It is vibrant, powerful, and inspiring.  Yes, the name of the piece is 1812; however, I believe that it is highly appropriate for today’s July 4th celebration.  The finale of this magnum opus is justifiably famous for employing actual cannons for maximum effect.  Happy Birthday, America, and to all my followers enjoy Tchaikovsky’s brilliant cascade of emotion and sound.

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!

“They tell us, sir, that we are weak – unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of Hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?

“Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.

“Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.  The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat, but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged, their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable – and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!

“It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace – but there is no peace. The war is actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!”

(Patrick Henry, “Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Death,” Second Virginia Convention, March 23, 1775)

The Sower, the Seed, and the Soil

One of Jesus’ more popular parables is the parable of the sower or the four soils.  Picture the Middle East during the first century…specifically, life in a fishing village along the shores of the Sea of Galilee.  The towns are abuzz with the news that Jesus stays at one of the homes.  He makes an appearance outside of it.  Soon enough, word spreads like jungle drums to the surrounding homes and towns.  It is not long before a mass of people floods this small, seacoast village.  Jesus spots an empty boat and plops himself down into it while the masses gather along the shore.  I call this church at the beach.  This is what they heard:

‘A sower went out to sow.  And as he sowed, some seeds fell along the path, and the birds came and devoured them.  Other seeds fell on rocky ground, where they did not have much soil, and immediately they sprang up, since they had no depth of soil, but when the sun rose they were scorched.  And since they had no root, they withered away.  Other seeds fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them.  Other seeds fell on good soil and produced grain, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.  He who has ears, let him hear’ (Matthew 13:3b-9, ESV).  

I bet these villagers exchanged various expressions of awe, confusion, or disgust or anything in between those attitudes.  Some of them might have said the following: “I can’t believe that I’ve stood in the blazing sun to hear this man teach about farming.”  Another villager probably shot back, “Oh yeah, I’m a fisherman in this village, so why not use that imagery?”  Alright, I have had enough fun.  Let me highlight something crucial at this point.  Regardless of what these seacoast villagers may or may not have been saying or thinking, Jesus did teach them the parable.  For those who have ears, there is an important truth to receive from it.  I think this is a key point.  It suggests the possibility that some in the crowd could have understood the gist of Jesus’ parable.  Of course, it is also possible that no one in the crowd understood it; however, I doubt the truth of that last statement.

One of my delights with the parable of the sower is that Jesus interprets it for the disciples and us.  He does so without being prompted by them unlike later on in the chapter with respect to the parable of the tares among wheat (Matt. 13:36, ESV).  If only Jesus had interpreted all of his parables in the thirteenth chapter of Matthew, but then, such a thing would have prevented many great sermons and commentaries from being written down through the ages.  Had Jesus filled in all of the blanks for us, I suspect the kingdom would lack a certain mystery to it along with our faith.  In the end, I believe it is important to be thankful that the Lord interpreted any of the parables.  Ok, without any further ado, here is the Lord’s interpretation of the parable of the sower:

“‘Hear then the parable of the sower: When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path.  As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away.  As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful.  As for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it.  He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty'” (Matt. 13:18-23, ESV).

Understanding the parable of the sower hinges upon three components: the sower, the seed, and the soil.  I think it is intriguing to note that Jesus does not identify the sower like he does with the seed and the soil.  This does not mean that the parable falls apart because the sower’s identity remains a mystery.  From my perspective, Jesus is the sower who inaugurates the kingdom during his earthly ministry.  He preaches the word (or the gospel) of the kingdom, which is the seed (Matt. 13:19, ESV).  It is true that we become sowers like the Lord, so I do not want to rule out that nuance.  When Jesus travels from city to city and region to region throughout his ministry, he encounters a variety of responses to his message.  In the parable of sower, the different types of soil represent the various responses to Jesus’ word of the kingdom.  The alarming thing about the response to the kingdom message is that only a fraction or one fourth of it bears fruit (or the spiritual life) of the word (Matt. 13:8, 23, ESV).

If someone instructed me with delivering an important message, and then warned me that most would reject it, I would smirk and walk away thinking that the person was delusional.  The whole thing comes off as upside down instead of right side up.  I want to win people over to the truth rather than drive them away; however, it is important to set aside this knee jerk reaction for what the Lord desires to convey through the parable of the sower.  The heart condition of some will be hard toward the truth, which allows the enemy to snatch it away (Matt. 13:4 & 19, ESV).  I think that believers in our day need to realize that some people will not want to receive, let alone hear, the good news of the kingdom.  Earlier in Matthew’s gospel, Jesus warns his disciples that he’s “…sending [them] out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matt. 10:16, ESV).  One more thing needs to be mentioned about the hard heart.  I do not believe that this condition is always permanent, but nonetheless, it is a real, heart condition.

The next two soil types are similar in that both give the appearance of life; however, neither the rocky soil nor its thorny cousin allows the seed to grow into a fruit-bearing plant.  Because of the rocks in the former, the plant’s root system is unable to dig deep.  It remains shallow and unable to handle the scorching heat of the sun.  Jesus interprets this as an illustration of a person that embraces the kingdom message on pure emotion.  When persecution comes his way on account of the word, he turns his back on the kingdom due to his shallow belief.  This is another way of saying that superficial belief in Jesus is really unbelief as it produces no fruit.  In a different way, the seed among thorns fails to display the spiritual life of the word.  These individuals drown in a sea of things.  Materialism is the symptom, but the idolatry of money is the disease (Matt. 6:24, ESV).  Instead of investing into his spiritual life, the thorny heart seeks for life and happiness in people, places, and things that suck it out of him.

Lastly, the good soil represents those who believe and understand the word of the kingdom.  These individuals demonstrate the spiritual life contained in the word whether 100 fold, sixty fold, or thirty fold.  There are some who emphasize that the order of fruitfulness indicates one of decline.  At first glance, this is an interesting observation about the parable of the sower.  I think there is a potential issue with it.  The context of the parable contrasts the fruitlessness of the seed sown among the path, the rocks and thorns versus the fruitfulness of the seed sown in good soil.  Where I land at the moment is that the good soil bears fruit regardless of its degree of fruitfulness.  To state it another way, I think the parable of the sower emphasizes that the kingdom word heard and understood produces fruit.  It is a fact that believers can bank on for the entirety of the present age.  In the next post, I will explore the parable of the tares among wheat or the parable of the weeds.

Intro to the Kingdom Parables of Matthew 13

Nearly every biblical scholar believes that the purpose behind Matthew’s gospel is to portray Jesus as Israel’s Messiah.  This is one of the reasons for the genealogy found in Matthew 1:1-17.   It starts off with the foremost patriarch in Israel’s history, father Abraham. Then it focuses on the line of Judah, who was Israel’s fourth son, blessed with the right to rule over his brothers and from whom the future Messiah would come (Genesis 49:8-12, ESV).  Several generations after Judah, a shepherd boy became Israel’s greatest king.  He destroyed his people’s greatest threat in Goliath while establishing the most peaceful reign throughout Israel’s history.  King David occupies the highest position out of all of Israel’s earthly kings; however, his reign foreshadows a time to come where a future descendant of his would sit on his throne in splendor and might (2 Samuel 7:12-16, ESV).

The gospel writer meticulously navigates Jesus’ lineage from David down to his parents, Mary and Joseph.  Matthew’s efforts establish two things right up front: 1.) Jesus is a descendant of King David and of Judah, which is the kingly line; and 2.) Because Jesus descends from Judah, this makes him the son of Abraham, an Israelite by birth.  Basically, Matthew’s genealogy demonstrates that Jesus is of royal stock and a true Israelite.  This elaborate presentation of our Lord’s ancestry raises another key point, which bubbles underneath the surface of Matthew’s gospel.  The Jewish people are the gospel writer’s intended audience.  These are men and women who know their heritage and the Torah.  At the risk of pretension, I view the gospel of Matthew as a Jewish one, or a message steeped in Jewish history and culture.  I can hear the objection ringing in my ears.  “What does this have to do with the kingdom parables found in Matthew thirteen?”  It thrills me to no end that you asked this question.

In the original Greek, the word parabole translates into parables in English.  It has several uses depending upon the context.  When one examines a Greek concordance, the predominant use of the word parabole pertains to a story or narrative that illustrates a central truth.  Whenever the word parabole pops up in the four gospels, this word means that Jesus employs a story to convey a key truth either with respect to the kingdom of heaven or its king.  Because Matthew portrays Jesus as the Messiah, then it follows that his gospel narrative provides many examples of Jesus using parables to teach something about the nature of his kingdom and himself.  It is my view that the kingdom parables of Matthew thirteen do not provide instruction for how one lives in the kingdom.  Our Lord’s sermon on the mount in Matthew chapters five through seven serves as the believer’s manual for kingdom living.  Matthew thirteen offers Jesus’ most concentrated teaching on the Messiah and his kingdom.

Now, I must include something about the purpose of the kingdom parables from Jesus’ perspective and Matthew, the writer.  Our Lord makes a crucial distinction between his disciples and the crowds.  He explains to his disciples that they have been granted to know the secrets of the kingdom instead of those in the crowd (Matthew 13:10-11, ESV).  At first glance this comes off as preferential treatment, but Jesus develops his response even further by pointing out that his parables and the crowds’ response to them fulfills Old Testament scripture (Matthew 13:13-15, ESV).  The difference between the disciples and the crowd has to do with the former’s relationship with Jesus.  This enables the disciples to have open hearts to the Lord’s message, which paves the way to receive his kingdom truths.  Their open hearts lead them to having the ears to hear his kingdom truths, and the eyes to see those truths.

When it comes to the crowds, they do not know Jesus.  He confirms this fact by citing the words of Israel’s greatest recorder of prophecy, Isaiah the prophet, which are found in Isaiah 6:9-10.  This particular passage resides within a larger section of scripture, which depicts God the Father calling for a prophet, Isaiah’s response to the Father’s call, and his being sent by the Father to prophesy to the nation of Israel.  From my perspective, the parallels between Isaiah and Christ are too obvious to miss.   Both men are sent with the Father’s message for an obstinate people.  History tells us that Isaiah died as a martyr.  The same thing takes place with our Lord.  I believe that Jesus knew these parallels, and intended to point them out to his disciples.  The striking thing to realize is that Isaiah penned his words about 700 years before Jesus uses them.  Apparently, nothing really changed among the people of Israel from Isaiah’s day to the time of Christ.

The apostle Matthew asserts that Jesus fulfills Old Testament prophecy by teaching in parables.  He comments “that [Jesus’ teaching] was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet: ‘I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter what has been hidden since the foundation of the world'” (Matthew 13:35, ESV).  Matthew’s citation comes from the book of Psalms in the seventy-eighth chapter and second verse.  He uses this passage to demonstrate that Jesus uses parables precisely for the purpose of revealing truths about the kingdom, which had been hidden or veiled by the Father.  The unique thing about Psalm seventy-eight is that it traces the Father’s guidance of Israel throughout history.  Toward the end of this Psalm, the writer references King David leading God’s people like a shepherd (Psalm 78:70-72, ESV).  I submit to my readers that this points to Christ himself as the one, true shepherd of Israel.

Finally, here are some quick hits about the thirteenth chapter of Matthew.  It contains seven parables, but a good argument could be made that Jesus’ account of the kingdom scribe is an eighth one (Matthew 13:52, ESV).  He delivers the first four parables to a mixed audience: the crowd and the disciples.  Jesus speaks the other three (or four) parables only in the presence of the disciples.  The Lord interprets only two of the seven or (eight) parables for them, which is a huge bummer.  There has been so much ink spilled over the ones left uninterpreted by Jesus.  Over the next week, I will examine these kingdom parables.  It is my sense that our Lord desires for us to see something about the nature of his king and his kingdom.

A Game Effort

Earlier today, the Belgium national football team eliminated the United States in extra time by a score of 2-1.  The game generated nerves, excitement, and frustration, and sometimes all three of those emotions occurred simultaneously.  For most of the game, the Red Devils of Belgium controlled possession and doubled the US team’s shots on goal.  Despite this fact, the game was scoreless at the half and at the end of regulation.  From my perspective, the player of the game goes to goalkeeper Tim Howard, who played the game of his life.  He made sixteen saves in a World Cup match, which set a record.  Because Howard shined for the US team, it begged the question about the rest of his teammates.

At times, the US team appeared to get behind the Belgian defense for a few chances here and there; however, at no point did the Stars and Stripes ever take control of the game.  The US team made several excellent defensive plays to keep the game scoreless going into the overtime periods.  Truth be told, it was really a matter of time before Belgium notched a goal.  Sure enough, the Red Devils scored not even five minutes into the first extra time period.  They scored the clincher near the end of the first fifteen minutes.  Julian Green came on as a substitute for the US, and he scored a pretty goal in the second fifteen minute period to make things a little more interesting.  In the end, it was not enough for the US as the Belgians advance to the quarterfinals against Argentina and Lionel Messi.

I tip my hat to the Belgians, who keep finding a way to win in the World Cup.  None of their games is pretty or even impressive.  They remind me a little bit of Spain, who won the World Cup in 2010; however, in no way am I suggesting that the Belgians are at the level of the Spaniards.  I do think the Argentinians will have their hands full against the Red Devils.  Messi is better than any one player for Belgium, but I think the latter is a more complete squad.  We will see what happens in the quarterfinal matches.  Lastly, I give a hearty congratulations to the US national team.  They made it out of a difficult group and into the round of 16.  I think this particular squad has accomplished quite a bit.  They can build on this performance.  These are exciting times for US soccer.