33Another parable He spoke to them: “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was all leavened.”
The fourth parable is about how evil can penetrate the kingdom of heaven unabated. This parable links to the previous one (mustard seed), as both move from small to great.
Another parable He spoke to them: “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven,
Yeast (leaven) almost always represents evil in the Bible. Yeast works internally to transform the nature of the dough. A small amount of yeast will penetrate throughout the flour or dough by a high state of fermentation. The dough rises to such a degree that the loaf of bread becomes huge.
which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal [one-and-a-half gallons] till it was all leavened.”
Jesus used leaven as a symbol for false doctrine. This parable emphasizes the ultimate consequences of false doctrine penetrating the borders of the kingdom.
False doctrine has permeating and pervasive power.
False doctrine will infiltrate all aspects of the kingdom until Jesus sets up His Millennial kingdom on earth at the end of the Tribulation. Counterfeit Christianity is always a pervasive danger to the integrity of Christianity. Ultimately, Christendom will end in complete apostasy.
i think your understanding is wrong…it says that the KINGDOM OF HEAVEN is like a leaven…
you said leaven is like evil?
hence it was compare to the Kingdom of God???
you gotta be kidding me
RC, I think your problem is that you are conflating the word “heaven” with all forms of God’s kingdom. For example, there is a kingdom on earth, the millennial kingdom, the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of God. The point in this passage has to do with Christ’s rule while He was on earth. During His earthly ministry evil penetrated what he tried to do. Note my comments on a previous study: https://versebyversecommentary.com/matthew/matthew-1310f/ It is important that you interpret the kingdom of heaven in its context/s.
There is a clue or two have found in OT in regard to understanding a parable, and they are quite eye opening. First you MUST use the KJV, compare your favorite modern if you will but trust the KJV, especially here. First turn to Ezekiel 17:2 where we learn a parable can be/is a riddle; riddles as a rule can NOT be taken at face value. Now turn to Proverbs 26:7 which says The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the mouth of fools. Two points here, first change “fools” too [thee] self confident, looked it up in Hebrew that is what word means. Second point note the mans legs are not EQUAL so is a parable in the mouth of the self confident- how is that(?), well his understanding of leaven is not the same as the law of God, how He defines it; in Mt 13:33 it is actually the Gospel which makes his understanding unequal like the lame mans legs,wow huh? Now read on to verse 9 in Proverbs 26 which says, As a thorn goeth up into the hand of a drunkard, so is a parable in the mouths of fools [i.e. thee self confident]. So because of his self confidence like the drunk who feels no pain the spiritually self confident does not recognize his spiritual hurt.
God bless you friends, hope you find this interesting and helpful. -Frank S….
Thanks for your thoughts.
There are two words for parable in the OT: מָשָׁל and דמה . The latter word only occurs one time (Hos 12:10. The Hebrew word מָשָׁ֑ל (mashal) can refer to a taunt (Isa 14:4), a riddle (Psa 49:4), an allegory (Ezek 17:2–10), or a proverb (Deut 28:37). A מָשָׁ֑ל (mashal) in the Old Testament falls under the category of non-proverbial Wisdom literature. The Greek word παραβολή denotes a placing beside (akin to paraballō, to throw or lay beside, to compare). It signifies a placing of one thing beside another with a view to comparison (some consider that the thought of comparison is not necessarily contained in the word). Hermeneutically, it is dangerous to use Hebrew words to interpret NT words and OT contexts with NT contexts. The proper modality is to interpret a word with the argument of the book of the Bible, then the general context within a book of the Bible, then the immediate context. Semantically, words can change even within a Bible book.
In Matthew 13:10 His disciples asked Him why He only spoke to them in parables, His answer itself reveals parables are riddles & not “akin to paraballō, to throw or lay beside, to compare” something. Jesus’ answer reveals too neither were parables common culturally understood forms of speech either as they were designed to conceal truth from them, even the Disciples did not understand Him. Have heard preachers preach this too, which is really strange.
The Hebrew word in Ez 17:2 translated riddle kjv, means ‘a hidden saying.’ [chidah], which corresponds exactly as Jesus explained in His answer to His disciples Mt 13:10-11.
A great deal of confusion is created when we do not use the same text; can tell you are using an Alexandrian source text translation as you use the word “allegory” and not riddle here which is the KJV’s RT word in Ez 17:2.
Words also have different meanings depending on how they are used too, if the context is missed a wrong word is oft used to translate. Proverb in Du 28:37 is a totally diff context too. Found chidah above is translated proverb in Hosea 2:6 and it still contains in the meaning something hidden, like a riddle does. I do not like categorizing things as we can easily miss His understanding with our academic categories.
Even the KJV translators miss contexts and chose wrong words occasionally; Isaiah 53:8 is a good example where they used FROM PRISON, it would be better translated through oppression which makes the verse make sense and is verified by Acts 8:33, Job 34:5, KJV of course.
Frank, I do not study from English translations but from the original languages. Neither do I take the majority or the critical text as primary. My primary problem with using the OT nomenclature is more a hermeneutical issue.
Had to look those two words up figure out what you were saying- hermeneutical & nomenclature. The one are man made/chosen principles of interpretation the other the naming of those man made/chosen principals of interpretation. Am certain those disciplines are like pharisaical blinders as He has made it quite clear in His word to us He has concealed truth for us to search Him out; if we approach His word with our own measure of understanding rather than searching out His we will regardless of our erudition have missed the mark, His mark. We should never take confidence in our knowledge, it puffs us up & blinds us.
Proverbs 26:9 King James Version (KJV)
9 As a thorn goeth up into the hand of a drunkard, so is a parable in the mouths of thee self confident.