31 He put before them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in his field; 32 it is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.”
33 He told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was leavened.”
…
44 “The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls; 46 on finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.
47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of every kind; 48 when it was full, they drew it ashore, sat down, and put the good into baskets but threw out the bad. 49 So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous 50 and throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
51 “Have you understood all this?” They answered, “Yes.” 52 And he said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.”
Matthew 13:31-33, 44-52 is a good example of what it was like to learn from Jesus.
The text is primarily a set of parables concerning the rule of God. Our image of the rule of God and the image of the rule of God in these parables may not be the same. Thus, although the rule of God is difficult to see today, Jesus invites us to see and then act appropriately. Such response would mean with joy and total commitment. As we learn in his ministry, Jesus invited people to follow him by leaving behind everything. These parables will invite us to consider what we value in an ultimate way. Jesus calls us to make a total commitment to something that we will not easily see or observe. The difficulty we will have in seeing is something like the difficulty many people have with wisdom. Part of our difficulty is that we lose ourselves in the trivialities and distractions that so often tempt us their direction. They may hear wise words from a person, but to hear in a way that leads to an insight or enlightenment that affects the way they live is a different matter. Such an observation also invites us to reflect upon the way we treat people who do not see what we see. Regardless of the truth we think we see clearly, we need to remember that truth has a hidden quality to it. Making our way through life is not easy. We know incompletely as if through a poor reflection in a mirror (I Corinthians 13:9, 12). We have some light, but only the dim light just before dawn (John Locke). We do not see clearly or distinctly (in contrast to the hopes of Rene Descartes). Jesus is hinting at such difficulty in these parables. Is the rule of God already present? If so, the rule of God is hardly obvious and tangible. In what sense is the rule of God present? Should I give myself to something that is not clearly observable? Many scientists would answer in the negative. Many poets and novelists would answer in the positive. Jesus seems to side with the latter. If the rule of God is so intangible, what type of influence will it have upon individuals and society? If the rule of God is present in this hidden way, in the natural processes of human life, then God must have much patience, grace, and respect for us to allow for the influence of the rule of God to spread in this way. If so, then we as those who learn the lessons of the parables must have the patience and grace with each other when we see little evidence of that rule in self, others, church, or society. Let us explore such matters for a moment.
It just might be that we could develop some modern parables from domestic and business life as well. He will teach the lesson of the mustard seed (31-32), which Matthew gets from Mark. The rule of God is like a mustard seed. In a proverbial sense of his time, the mustard seed was the smallest of all seeds. The weed was an annual shrub that would grow from two to six feet tall. One could cultivate it for spices.[1] In unusual cases, it might get 9 to 15 feet high, so “tree” might be appropriate. Birds will make their nests in the branches. Jesus is drawing on imagery from the Old Testament. Ezekiel 17:22-23, 31:6 refers to the mighty cedar providing shade for the birds. Daniel 4:12 has a similar image that finds its interpretation in the king providing protection to people in verses 20-22. The distinctiveness of Jesus at this point shows itself in the image of the rule of God as a shrub rather than the mighty cedar or oak. The image may even be a critique of the arrogance of the image in Daniel. The arrogance to which the image appeals in Daniel gives way to the modest affair of the rule of God as proclaimed by Jesus. The rule of God offers little by way of earthly reward, and thus contrasted his view of the rule of God from the typical hope human beings have for greatness. The rule of God is inconspicuous, growing in its ability to provide shelter for others.[2] He will teach the lesson of the leaven or yeast (verse 33), which has its source in the Q document, the material in common between Matthew and Luke. The rule of God, for Jesus, is like the yeast a woman works into flour. The yeast is present, working its influence, even though hidden from sight. Just as the woman intentionally hides the yeast, so also God intentionally planned the hidden quality of divine rule within humanity. Jesus takes a simple image of domestic life and turns it into an image of the rule of God. The small amount of yeast contrasts sharply with the large amount of flour. The smallness of the amount is an indication of the profound affect it will have. This hiddenness is the result of the divine plan. The rule of God will not appear to succeed. A surprising element here is that Jesus takes an image he uses for evil and now uses it in a positive sense. He refers to the leaven of Herod and Pharisees. Paul will use the image negatively in I Corinthians 5:6-9. Such a use would be striking and provocative. Jesus might even suggest that the rule of God has dubious moral value. If so, he would be contrasting the values of the rule of God with the values of human authority. The difficulty of this image is whether humanity will be able to discern the working of the rule of God at all. Yet, according to Jesus, the rule of God is near, in the natural relationships and processes of a human life.[3] Jesus taught the lesson of a hidden treasure (verse 44). This parable is unique to Matthew. The rule of God is like a jar with coins or jewelry hidden in a field. Given the nature of the oppressive rule of the Romans, hiding household valuables like this would be common. It was also a way to protect against thieves. Surprisingly, someone finds it, hides it, and has joy, which is the focus of the parable, and sells everything he has to buy the field. The treasure is the real actor in the story. Jesus could point to the dubious moral quality of the act of the finder, but a focus upon that would seem to miss the point. The rule of God is like a hidden treasure that one finds, has immense joy in finding, and is willing to sell everything one has to possess it. If one would put forth such effort for an earthly treasure, should one not give up everything if one finds the rule of God? The finder has joy because of the presence and nearness of the rule of God. Such joy and commitment reflect the call of Jesus for his audience to respond to the nearness of the rule of God.[4] Those who see the rule of God will spare no effort to attain it. The point is the joy and sacrifice of the finder. Jesus taught a lesson involving the merchant as the finder of an excellent pearl (verses 45-6), which we find uniquely in Matthew. The pearl was a common image for something precious. Jesus used it to refer to wisdom in Matthew 7:6. The rule of God is like one of the few of the upper middle-class entrepreneurs of the day, a merchant, who is searching for excellent pearls. In this case, he finds one of immense value, sells everything he has, and buys it. As a practical matter, such an act would do nothing for the merchant. The merchant seems silly. Yet, Jesus invites us to reflect upon what we value. Jesus implies the excitement and joy of the merchant, but also stresses the sacrifice and commitment of the merchant in order to possess the pearl. Jesus also viewed his ministry as proclaiming what is of ultimate value, the nearness of the rule of God, before people who are searching. Jesus calls his hearers to make the type of total commitment the merchant makes here for something that is of only finite and earthly value.[5]Jesus taught a lesson of the fishnet (verses 47-50), which we find uniquely in Matthew. The rule of God is like anglers who drew into their nets fish of every kind. Only at the end will they separate the good from the bad. Jesus would eventually face such a bad fish in Judas, of course. The fellowship of the church will always include some bad fish. The fellowship is always a mixture.[6] The point here would appear to be patience until the end. Human beings do not have enough knowledge or wisdom to make the decision while they are fishing for people. As Matthew ends this collection of parables (verses 51-52), he has one more thing to add about parables. The disciple has a responsibility to interpret the parables. Matthew wants people to “understand.” The disciple is the new scribe schooled in the rule of God. Draw upon old and new images. One needs to understand the claim the rule of God has upon our lives. The rule of God as Jesus understood it draws upon images from the Old Testament, but in the light of Jesus, the follower of Jesus will see the rule of God in a different way than did Israel. The way to wisdom in the present the unfound door, the lost lane, and the forgotten language of the past. Remembering it will be the key to our enlightenment today.
The rule of God might be like the following films:
The Big Sleep, starring Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall
Bringing Up Baby, starring Katharine Hepburn and Cary Grant
Dirty Harry, starring Clint Eastwood
Dracula, starring Bela Lugosi
Duck Soup, starring the Marx Brothers
King Kong, starring Fay Wray and, well, that big ape
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
The 39 Steps, directed by Alfred Hitchcock
The Wild One, starring Marlon Brando
Such iconic films in movie history never received a single academy award nomination in the years they came out, but history has shown their significance.
Maybe the rule of God is like a floating flock of sea birds, whose bodies and intentions are so in sync that they suddenly all dive at the same moment, as if on cue.
The rule of God may be like a plumber, who unexpectedly returns our desperate phone-recorded plea. He comes after hours and fits together all the broken pipes perfectly so that the water and our household once again run according to plan.
The rule of God is like the toddler who escaped from his class and delightedly ran into all over the sanctuary during the sermon, squealing with happiness of his freedom which trashed the intended end of your sermon and brought smiles to every present.
The kingdom is heaven is like a subway ride. Steven Covey relates the story of being on a subway in New York. People were sitting quietly. A man and his children entered the car. The children were soon yelling back and forth, throwing things, even grabbing people's papers. It was very disturbing. And yet, the father sitting next to him did nothing. It was difficult not to feel irritated. He could not believe the father would do nothing while the children were disturbing everyone else. Finally, after what was an unusual patience and restraint, he said, "Sir, your children are really disturbing a lot of people. I wonder if you couldn't control them a little more?" The man, who seemed to be gazing into a distant land, seemed to become aware of the situation for the first time. "Oh, you're right. I guess I should do something about it. We just came from the hospital where their mother died about an hour ago. I don't know what to think, and I guess they don't know how to handle it either." Of course, everything changed. In an instant. There was no irritation. "Your wife just died? Oh, I'm so sorry! Can you tell me about it? What can I do to help?"
The kingdom of heaven is like a bee. You see, one always keeps bees. Never just a single bee. You can put a single bee in the most favorable temperature for bees, an ideal place, and it will die within two or three days. There is something about the community of bees that keeps it alive.
Of course, the rule of God is most like – Jesus of Nazareth, one born to humble Jewish parents, who gathered twelve disciples from diverse perspectives of his time, taught in a way to help people see what was truly important in life, healed the sick, battled for liberation from demonic forces, confronted religious and political leaders of his day, received officially endorsed violence, and yet, the end of his story is resurrection to new life with God.
This is no theological treatise Jesus gives us. It is more like a pile of snapshots. Far from providing a street map of heaven, these parables are mere hints, suggestions, and intimations. How could our small, timebound human minds take in the reality of God’s eternal realm? The best any of us can do is to trade — as Jesus does — in parables and dreamlike imagery, trusting that, one day, all will be revealed. If we try to grasp life and its mysteries, we will fail. The bucket we take into a river will not contain the river. Running water needs to run. Life and God are more like that.
Matthew 13:31-32 is the parable of the mustard seed. The source is Mark 4:30-32, also occurring in Luke 13:18-19.
31 He put before them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven (οὐρανῶν, “the heavens”), a Jewish term, suggesting either the Jewishness of Matthew and his audience or the Semitic idiom Jesus might have used, is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in his field; 32 it is the smallest of all the seeds. The weed was an annual shrub that would grow from two to sex feet tall. One could cultivate them for spices.[7] In unusual cases, it might get 9 to 15 feet high, so “tree” might be appropriate. Birds will make their nests in the branches. Jesus is drawing on imagery from the Old Testament.[8] Ezekiel 17:22-23, 31:6 refers to mighty cedar providing shade for the birds. Daniel 4:12 has a similar image that finds its interpretation in the king providing protection to people in verses 20-22. The distinctiveness of Jesus at this point shows itself in the image of the rule of God as a shrub rather than the mighty cedar or oak. The image may even be a critique of the arrogance of the image in Daniel. The mustard seed is a parody of the mighty cedar of Lebanon and the apocalyptic tree of Daniel. It pokes fun at the arrogance and aspirations connected with that image. For Jesus, God’s rule was a modest affair, not obvious to the untutored eye. The arrogance to which the image appeals in Daniel gives way to the modest affair of the rule of God as proclaimed by Jesus. It offers little by way of earthly reward, and thus contrasted his view of the rule of God from the typical hope human beings have for greatness. Jesus did not want it confused with traditional, mundane hope. The rule of God is inconspicuous, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches,” growing in its ability to provide shelter for others.[9]
The emphasis is on the contrast between an insignificant beginning and a magnificent end. The followers of Jesus will not appear to succeed. Though the kingdom of heaven looks insignificant to the disciples on the narrative level and to the hearers of the parable in Matthew's community, Jesus assures his audience that while the kingdom may begin inconspicuously, it will grow from its small beginnings in such a way that even the birds of the air will be able to nest in it. These two symbols suggest that the use of the mustard seed for the kingdom of heaven in this parable highlights God's cosmic rule as well as the idea that the kingdom of heaven will evolve to such a state that it will provide life and sustenance for all who are oppressed.[10] This perspective coheres with Matthew's earlier statements that emphasize reward for the poor in spirit, comfort for the mourners and the promise of the kingdom of heaven for those who are persecuted (5:3-4, 10). Barth offers that the Christian must delay to take up his or her post, to keep watch, to become this seed and live in the hope to which this parable directs us.[11]
Matthew 13:33 is the parable of the leaven. The source is the material Matthew and Luke 13:20-21 have in common. He will teach the lesson of the leaven or yeast.
The rule of God, for Jesus, is like the yeast a woman works into flour. The yeast is present, working its influence, even though hidden from sight. Just as the woman intentionally hides the yeast, so also God intentionally planned the hidden quality of divine rule within humanity. This parable suggests that we should we re-evaluate the meanest of domestic material. Anything has the potential for great growth. Given the enormous yield, it is silly. Yeast has a connection with Passover. We can locate the kingdom in church meals, where there is more than enough for others.[12] Jesus takes a simple image of domestic life and turns it into an image of the rule of God. The small amount of yeast contrasts sharply with the large amount of flour. The smallness of the amount is not an indication of the profound affect it will have. This hiddenness is the result of the divine plan. The rule of God will not appear to succeed.
33 He told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven (οὐρανῶν, “the heavens”), a Jewish term, suggesting either the Jewishness of Matthew and his audience or the Semitic idiom Jesus might have used, is like yeast. The New Testament customarily regarded leaven as a symbol for corruption and evil. In Matthew 16, his followers are to beware the leaven of the scribes and Pharisees. Mark 8:15 refers to the leaven of Herod. I Corinthians 5:6-9 refers to leaven as well. Here, Jesus employs it in a positive sense. That makes his use of the image striking and provocative. It paints a simple but arresting picture that depends, for its cogency, on the juxtaposition of contrary images. To compare the rule of God to leaven is to compare it to something corrupt and unholy, just the opposite of what God's rule is supposed to be. The life of poverty and social marginality embodied by the persons whom this community represents, viewed by others as desperate and despicable, was identified with the rule of God and said to be quite frankly happy, healthy, and sufficiently supplied. The rule of God, like leaven in a lump of dough, denotes the permeating power at work in such a social posture. The dubious moral value of the substance in question is precisely germane to the comparison being made. For the rule of God as embodied by the persons whom this community represents appeared within their corner of the ancient Mediterranean world, exuding the same mixed virtue of fermenting decadence that leaven manifests in bread. The rule of God is like yeast that a woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was leavened.” The surprise increases when Jesus notes that there were fifty pounds of flour. Note that Sarah used this amount to entertain heavenly visions in Genesis 18. The extravagant amount suggests the extravagant nature of the kingdom of heaven.[13] The yeast is present, working its influence, even though hidden from sight. Just as the woman intentionally hides the yeast, so also God intentionally planned the hidden quality of divine rule within humanity. Jesus takes a simple image of domestic life and turns it into an image of the rule of God. The small amount of yeast contrasts sharply with the large amount of flour. The smallness of the amount is not an indication of the profound affect it will have. This hiddenness is the result of the divine plan. The rule of God will not appear to succeed. A surprising element here is that Jesus takes an image often used for evil and now uses it in a positive sense. Jesus refers to the leaven of Herod and Pharisees. Paul will use the image negatively in I Corinthians 5:6-9. Such a use would be striking and provocative. Jesus might even suggest that the rule of God has dubious moral value. If so, he would be contrasting the values of the rule of God with the values of human rule. The difficulty of this image is whether humanity will be able to discern the working of the rule of God at all. The nature of the kingdom of heaven is hidden to Jesus' opponents and to those who persecute the Matthean community (5:11-12, 43-48; 10:16-23; 24:9-14). Yet, the influence of the kingdom will continue. Yet, according to Jesus, the rule of God is near, in the natural relationships and processes of a human life.[14]
Matthew 13:44 is the parable of the treasure. The source is material unique to Matthew. 44 “The kingdom of heaven (οὐρανῶν, “the heavens”), a Jewish term, suggesting either the Jewishness of Matthew and his audience or the Semitic idiom Jesus might have used, is like treasure hidden in a field, Jesus would have thought of a jar with coins or jewelry. Given the nature of the oppressive rule of the Romans, hiding precious valuables like this would be common. It was also a way to protect against thieves. Pearls were highly valued in the days of Jesus. There are stories of pearls being worth well over one million dollars. This hidden treasure, which someone, surprisingly, found and hid; then in his joy, which is the focus of the parable, he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. The treasure is the real actor in the story. Jesus could point to the dubious moral quality of the act of the finder. By covering up the treasure and buying the field, the person deceives the owner. This is comparable to the behavior of the shrewd manager in Lk 16:1-8a. Surprising moves such as this, in which Jesus employs a dubious moral example, appear to be characteristic of Jesus’ parable technique. Yet, would such an interpretation push the images too far? The point of the parable has nothing to do with the morality of the finder, or with how this person found the treasure. In Baba Bathra 4:8f, the finder would have the legal right to the treasure. However, a focus upon that would seem to miss the point. The rule of God is like a hidden treasure that one finds, has great joy in finding, and is willing to sell everything one has in order to possess it. If one would put forth such effort for an earthly treasure, should one not give up everything if one finds the rule of God? The finder has joy because of the presence and nearness of the rule of God. Such joy and commitment reflect the call of Jesus to respond to the nearness of the rule of God.[15]Those who see the rule of God will spare no effort to attain it. The point is the joy and sacrifice of the finder.
Clearly, the ministry of Jesus has an orientation toward a call that we should commit ourselves totally to the rule of God that he declared as imminent.[16] Once people see the rule of God as it really is, they will spare no effort and consider no sacrifice too great to attain to it. Therefore, the object of preaching is that the kingdom is so precious that people will consider that all other goods lose their value. C. H. Dodd asks if the focus of the parable is the value of the rule of God or the sacrifice to attain it. He believes the answer is the latter. After all, Jesus’ audience would not have had to be convinced of the value of the rule of God. Typically, the parables invite a judgment upon human action. Was the finder of the treasure a fool for becoming impoverished to attain the treasure? Was the merchant in verses 45-46 a fool for doing the same? The setting in life is those situations in which Jesus invites people to join a cause that from what one can observe from one perspective is losing. If the rule of God is in some way associated with the ministry of Jesus, then the parables make sense. Jesus is making an appeal for a specific course of action. For other interpreters, however, the parable focuses on the effect of the joyful news of the kingdom being so overpowering that it fills the heart with gladness, making the whole of life the consummation of the divine community and produce the most whole-hearted ad self-sacrifice.
Matthew 13:45-46 is the parable of the pearl. The source is material unique to Matthew. Jesus taught a lesson involving the merchant as the finder of an excellent pearl. The pearl was a common image for something precious. Jesus used it to refer to wisdom in Matthew 7:6. 45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven (οὐρανῶν, “the heavens”), a Jewish term, suggesting either the Jewishness of Matthew and his audience or the Semitic idiom Jesus might have used, is like a merchant (note a wealthy merchant is the key player here) intentionally in search of fine pearls; 46 on finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it. The rule of God is like one of the few of the upper middle-class entrepreneurs of the day, a merchant, who is searching for excellent pearls. In this case, he finds one of immense value, sells everything he has, and buys it. As a practical matter, such an act would do nothing for the merchant. The merchant seems silly. Yet, Jesus invites us to reflect upon what we value. Jesus implies the excitement and joy of the merchant, but also stresses the sacrifice and commitment of the merchant to possess the pearl. Jesus also viewed his ministry as proclaiming what is of ultimate value, the nearness of the rule of God, before people who are searching. Jesus calls his hearers to make the type of total commitment the merchant makes here for something that is of only finite and earthly value.[17] Do we know what we value? What is the ground of our being? What is our ultimate concern? The point of a parable like this has the effect of saying, “Think about it!”[18]
Matthew 13:47-50 is the parable of the fishnet. The source is material unique to Matthew.
47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven (οὐρανῶν, “the heavens”), a Jewish term, suggesting either the Jewishness of Matthew and his audience or the Semitic idiom Jesus might have used, is like a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of every kind; 48 when it was full, they drew it ashore, sat down, and put the good into baskets but threw out the bad. 49 So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous 50 and throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. The rule of God is like anglers who drew into their nets fish of every kind. Only at the end will they separate the good from the bad. Jesus would eventually face such a bad fish in Judas, of course. The fellowship of the church will always include some bad fish. The fellowship is always a mixture.[19] The point here would appear to be patience until the end. Human beings do not have enough knowledge or wisdom to make the decision while they are fishing for people.
Matthew places the emphasis upon the Last Judgment, with this being the last of his list of parables in Matthew 13. This passage reflects the necessity of the young Christian movement to mark off its social boundaries from the large world, hence the interest in sorting out the good from the bad. The separation of the good from the bad at the end of the age is typical Matthew theme and represents the way he understood this parable.
Matthew 13:51-52 is a conclusion to the chapter on parables. The source is material unique to Matthew.
51 “Have you understood all this?” He refers to the teaching in Matthew 13. They answered, “Yes.” 52 And he said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.” The emphasis is upon the disciples and their responsibility in interpreting the parables, in separating the old from the new. For Matthew, everything depends upon understanding. The whole collection of parables is a didactic discourse on the rule of God. They are the new scribes. For Matthew, the scribe schooled in the rule of God will understand the parables. Like the disciples, they will draw upon images and stories, old and new, from a large repertoire and then explaining what they mean for those present. It forms the conclusion to this collection of parables and gives insight into how he believed parables could be understood. Discipleship enables one to understand fully the nature of the kingdom of heaven, its radical call and its totalizing claim. Furthermore, for Matthew, the kingdom of heaven, while new, still exists in continuity with Israel's traditions. At the same time, however, the Christ-event sheds fresh light on the old.
As Matthew ends this collection of parables, he has one more thing to add about parables. The disciple has a responsibility to interpret the parables. Matthew wants people to “understand.” The disciple is the new scribe schooled in the rule of God. Draw upon old and new images. One needs to understand the claim the rule of God has upon our lives. The rule of God as Jesus understood it draws upon images from the Old Testament, but in the light of Jesus, the follower of Jesus will see the rule of God in a separate way than did Israel.
[1] (M. Eugene Boring, "The Gospel of Matthew", New Interpreter's Bible Commentary [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995], 309, Craig Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, [Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1999], 388; H. L. Ellison, "Matthew" New International Bible Commentary[Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979], 1136).
[2] (Warren Carter, "Matthew", New Interpreter's Study Bible [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003], 1770).
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7] (M. Eugene Boring, "The Gospel of Matthew", New Interpreter's Bible Commentary [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995], 309, Craig Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, [Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1999], 388; H. L. Ellison, "Matthew" New International Bible Commentary[Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979], 1136).
[8] Ezekiel 17:22-23
22 Thus says the Lord God: I myself will take a sprig from the lofty top of a cedar; I will set it out. I will break off a tender one from the topmost of its young twigs; I myself will plant it on a high and lofty mountain. 23 On the mountain height of Israel I will plant it, in order that it may produce boughs and bear fruit, and become a noble cedar. Under it every kind of bird will live; in the shade of its branches will nest winged creatures of every kind.
Ezekiel 31:6
All the birds of the air made their nests in its boughs; under its branches all the animals of the field gave birth to their young; and in its shade all great nations lived.
Daniel 4:12
Its foliage was beautiful, its fruit abundant, and it provided food for all. The animals of the field found shade under it, the birds of the air nested in its branches, and from it all living beings were fed.
Daniel 4:20-22
20 The tree that you saw, which grew great and strong, so that its top reached to heaven and was visible to the end of the whole earth, 21 whose foliage was beautiful and its fruit abundant, and which provided food for all, under which animals of the field lived, and in whose branches the birds of the air had nests— 22 it is you, O king! You have grown great and strong. Your greatness has increased and reaches to heaven, and your sovereignty to the ends of the earth.
[9] (Warren Carter, "Matthew", New Interpreter's Study Bible [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003], 1770).
[10] (Warren Carter, "Matthew", New Interpreter's Study Bible [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003], 1770).
[11]
[12] Amy-Jill Levine, The Misunderstood Jew (p. 36)
[13] (M. Eugene Boring, "The Gospel of Matthew", New Interpreter's Bible Commentary [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995], 309).
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18] Amy-Jill Levine said something like this in a lecture I attended.
[19]
No comments:
Post a Comment