Why was it necessary for Christ to hide truth in a parable

The context speaks a lot to the rich man's understanding, however, it showed what the rich man could not accept, and would not accept. Jesus provided point blank knowledge on what it would take to enter the kingdom, and the rich man could not accept it. Jesus told him that he would have to do something he just couldn't do. Did Jesus change the requirements afterwards and say, "Ok, I understand. How about I do this?" The standard NEVER changes.

Context, the disciples question was "Then who can be saved?" It wasn't about rich men, but about ANYONE. Why? Think about Job. Job's friends had an opinion about God and how life works. They were wrong, but they still had one. The disciples also had an opinion about how life works, and Jesus just told them they were wrong. So if they were wrong on rich people being blessed by God because God really wanted them, and they were at the front of the line at the gate for entrance to the Kingdom, but Jesus just said that they have no chance, then who has a chance? Jesus said... NO ONE. NO ONE has a chance, accept God allow it. That is, with man it is impossible, but with God (God must act), everything is possible. Jesus just underscored that it is in fact God who gets to choose who spends eternity with Him. We don't get to tell God who He must accept, or He is evil, or anything like that.
Again, God must save. Man cannot save himself

The issue is can man believe.

I have posted a number showing he can

You have not rebutted them


Luke 8:13 (NASB 2020) — 13 Those on the rocky soil are the ones who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and yet these do not have a firm root; they believe for a while, and in a time of temptation they fall away.

This clearly shows man capable of understanding and belief

John 12:40 (NASB 2020) — 40 “HE HAS BLINDED THEIR EYES AND HE HARDENED THEIR HEART, SO THAT THEY WILL NOT SEE WITH THEIR EYES AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART, AND BE CONVERTED, AND SO I WILL NOT HEAL THEM.”

This shows man capable of understanding and belief which would be saving if not prevented

John 20:31 (NASB 2020) — 31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that by believing you may have life in His name.

This clearly shows some might believe and as a result be saved through the reading of scripture

to deny that is to deny scripture
 
Certainly, in the light of it.

Calvinism teaches men are incapable of belief unless first regenerated.

That would make the necessity to hide truth in parables superflous.
So God is superfluous now, or perhaps He knows more about what is going on than any of us...other than you? Please, oh mystic reader, please explain to us the thought process of God. Also, tell us all the other external extigencies that exist in the universe that could perhaps be behind God still hiding the truth from others. Perhaps the idea that God was being merciful in limiting their culpability. The idea that, the more knowledge one has and rejects, the greater the torment in eternity. The greater the punishment. The greater the wrath. Notice how Sodom and Gomorrah will be spared the wrath to come to Capernum and other places, where Jesus said that because of what they had seen, their torment will be greater.
 
So God is superfluous now, or perhaps He knows more about what is going on than any of us...other than you? Please, oh mystic reader, please explain to us the thought process of God. Also, tell us all the other external extigencies that exist in the universe that could perhaps be behind God still hiding the truth from others. Perhaps the idea that God was being merciful in limiting their culpability. The idea that, the more knowledge one has and rejects, the greater the torment in eternity. The greater the punishment. The greater the wrath. Notice how Sodom and Gomorrah will be spared the wrath to come to Capernum and other places, where Jesus said that because of what they had seen, their torment will be greater.
Seriously ? Not God but the need to hide truth from those not able to believe it

Read the passage

Mark 4:10–12 (KJV 1900) — 10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable. 11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: 12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

What was being prevented?
 
Mark 4:10–12 (NASB 2020) — 10 As soon as He was alone, His followers, along with the twelve disciples, began asking Him about the parables. 11 And He was saying to them, “To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but for those who are outside, everything comes in parables, 12 so that WHILE SEEING THEY MAY SEE, AND NOT PERCEIVE, AND WHILE HEARING, THEY MAY HEAR, AND NOT UNDERSTAND, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT RETURN AND IT WOULD BE FORGIVEN THEM.”

Why if man is born with no ability to receive biblical truth is Christ hiding the truth in a parable?

How is it that this is to prevent a circumstance in which they might otherwise return (repent) and be forgiven?
To DECREASE THEIR GUILT, and consequently their punishment if they don't accept.

The one who transgresses ignorantly receives few stripes, while the one who transgresses KNOWINGLY receives many stripes.

Simple as that (Luke 12:47,48)
 
To DECREASE THEIR GUILT, and consequently their punishment if they don't accept.

The one who transgresses ignorantly receives few stripes, while the one who transgresses KNOWINGLY receives many stripes.

Simple as that (Luke 12:47,48)
That makes no sense

If they have no power to believe, there is no need to prevent their belief

It's as simple as that.
 
That makes no sense

If they have no power to believe, there is no need to prevent their belief

It's as simple as that.

Does anyone hold the truth in unrighteousness.....?

I've told you, this is part of the "cutoff process". God just doesn't kill those that have rejected Him immediately. Those men still have influence in this life.

Cain deserved to die and that would have been the end of his influence. God didn't because men must learn to willfully choose God. It is not a simple process. At every level it is challenging over and over again throughout our entire lives.
 
Last edited:
Mark 4:10–12 (NASB 2020) — 10 As soon as He was alone, His followers, along with the twelve disciples, began asking Him about the parables. 11 And He was saying to them, “To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but for those who are outside, everything comes in parables, 12 so that WHILE SEEING THEY MAY SEE, AND NOT PERCEIVE, AND WHILE HEARING, THEY MAY HEAR, AND NOT UNDERSTAND, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT RETURN AND IT WOULD BE FORGIVEN THEM.”

Why if man is born with no ability to receive biblical truth is Christ hiding the truth in a parable?

How is it that this is to prevent a circumstance in which they might otherwise return (repent) and be forgiven?
Because His foreknowledge about the false doctrines that would creep into the church were exposed in His teachings. :) Jesus provided warnings for us about those who would try and teach the doctrines of grace.
 
Does anyone hold the truth in unrighteousness.....?

I've told you, this is part of the "cutoff process". God just doesn't kill those that have rejected Him immediately. Those men still have influence in this life.

Cain deserved to die and that would have been the end of his influence. God didn't because men but learn to willfully choose God. It is not a simple process. At every level it is challenged over and over again throughout our entire lives.
??????????????????????????

The issue is Calvinisms claim that man is unable to understand spiritual truth

Were this true there would be no need to hide it from them
 
??????????????????????????

The issue is Calvinisms claim that man is unable to understand spiritual truth

Were this true there would be no need to hide it from them

I can agree in this part of your argument. Again, I'm arguing construct. There are more arguments to be made in this. It is a defense against the specific issue but doesn't provide a foundation to combat the argument as a whole. I'm grasping for an analogy of what I'm trying to say here and I'm currently unable to think of one. I'll mediate on this and get back with you.
 
I can agree in this part of your argument. Again, I'm arguing construct. There are more arguments to be made in this. It is a defense against the specific issue but doesn't provide a foundation to combat the argument as a whole. I'm grasping for an analogy of what I'm trying to say here and I'm currently unable to think of one. I'll mediate on this and get back with you.
OK
 
Back
Top Bottom