Presbyterian Seminary President Rips in ‘Parable of the Wedding Banquet,’ calls it ‘Disturbing’ and ‘Inflammatory’

Protestia ^ | January 11, 2024 | staff

[Morgana]

Rev. Dr. Victor Aloyo, Jr is the President of Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, GA, one of the 12 seminaries belonging to the heretical Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Previously serving as the Associate Dean of Institutional Diversity and Community Engagement at Princeton Theological Seminary (PCUSA), Aloyo recently preached a barnburner of a bad sermon at Saint Luke’s Presbyterian Church in Dunwoody, Ga.

Here, Aloyo ripped into the parable of the wedding banquet in Matthew 22, explaining, “If what we hear in today’s gospel is really what the kingdom of heaven is like, friends, then I am not interested.”

Describing it as “disturbing” and “inflammatory,” he reveals that he is “mystified by the behavior of characters in this bizarre little story,” saying that it does not fit the image of the kingdom of heaven. Later, he calls it a “complex and painful text” and insists “there are too many contradictions and inconsistencies to take it at face value.”

VIDEO ON LINK

[SisterK]

So what does he disagree with, specifically?

Without reading the article (in true FR tradition), I would guess that he has a problem with folks being excluded from the wedding banquet because they are not dressed appropriately.
Dressing appropriately would be exchanging our filthy rags for Christ's righteousness.

[SisterK]

Amen

[beethovenfan]

He needn’t worry about the kingdom of heaven. He will never be there.

[PerConPat]

As the Chief Diversity Administrator at Princeton, Dr. Aloyo was directly responsible to the seminary president on diversity, equity, and inclusive excellence.

Apparently, the DEI movement is now spawning creatures who are now appropriating the godlike power to dispense with holy scripture.

This cat is hallucinating.

[oldplayer]

Well . . . the good Reverend is not wrong. The parable IS “disturbing” and “inflammatory.” That’s why Jesus told it, HE meant it to be so, for our sake.

[Reverend Wright]

Wait until this guy finds out about the The Parable of the Wicked Tenants.

[hinckley buzzard]

No. Considering these are not Christians, it is naturally a mystery to them. Their leftover cult is dying, and I would pay it no mind.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

“If what we hear in today’s gospel is really what the kingdom of heaven is like, friends, then I am not interested.”

Then enjoy hell.

No one is going to drag you into heaven.

[grumpa]

Parable of the Wedding Feast

by Charles S. Meek

You remember the story in Matthew 22:1-14. Jesus was discussing the kingdom of heaven and the refusal of those invited to the wedding feast to attend. Those invited killed the king’s servants! The king was obviously greatly perturbed and administered his justice by destroying their city and casting the perpetrators into “outer darkness.”

Now, how could you miss what is going on here, especially in the greater context of chapters 21 through 26? Who was invited to the wedding?―the servants, which were clearly the Jews. The bride of Christ is, of course, the church (Ephesians 5:32; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 19:7-8). The details of the parable dwell on the Jews’ sins of (a) persecuting Christian servants, and (b) failing to accept Jesus as Messiah!

Matthew 21:33-45—the Parable of the Tenants, sheds light on the Parable of the Wedding Feast. A vineyard is an Old Testament metaphor for Israel, so the tenants were the Jews of Old Covenant Israel whom Jesus was addressing. The tenants (the Jews) not only killed the king’s servants (Christians), but killed the son (Jesus)!

In punishment, God took the kingdom from the wicked tenants. The parable ends with this: “When the chief priests and Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that He was speaking about them.” Justice.

The Old Testament repeatedly, beginning in Deuteronomy 28-32, prophesied that there would come a time—in the last days—when Israel would become so apostate that God would take the kingdom from them and give it to others. This would happen at Messiah’s coming (Daniel 9, 12; Zechariah 12-14; etc). Jesus was telling them: THE TIME WAS AT HAND TO FULFILL ALL THAT WAS WRITTEN (Luke 3:7-9; 21:22).

So, these parables are not about some far distant judgment or some theological discourse about how we are saved. It is about the soon coming destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70. In Matthew 22:7 Jesus prophesied that their city would be burned! This literally happened in AD 70 when God used the Roman army to demolish Jerusalem and the temple.

Need more proof? In the very next chapter, Matthew 23:29-39, Jesus proclaimed the most powerful curse on the Jews. He told them that they would suffer the punishment for “all the righteous blood” EVER SHED ON EARTH! And it would happen in THEIR GENERATION. Wow!

Then the famous Olivet Discourse which follows immediately—Chapter 24. Here Jesus gets even more specific. The cherished Jewish temple would be left in rubble IN THEIR GENERATION (Matthew 24:2, 34). And, in Matthew 26:64 Jesus added insult to injury. He told the high priest and the other Jewish bigwigs that THEY THEMSELVES would see Him (Jesus) coming in power (on “clouds of heaven”). Again, the Jews understood that Jesus was claiming deity and authority to judge THEM, just as Yahweh “came on a cloud” in judgment numerous times in the Old Testament against his enemies.

The Marriage Supper of the Lamb appears again in Revelation 19:6-10. Revelation’s central them (chapters 17-19) is about the defeat of Babylon the harlot. The woman is described as being dressed in purple and scarlet (Revelation 17:40), which are the colors of the Jewish priesthood (Ezekiel 28:5-6; 39:1-2). In the Old Testament, whenever Israel is unfaithful, she is described as a harlot and an adulterer (Isaiah 1:21; Jeremiah 2:20; 3:6-9; Ezekiel 16:14-15; Hosea 9:1).

***************

For more articles about Bible prophecy, see my website:

https://prophecyquestions.com

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

Yep.

There were two reasons for the robes, one you were honoring your guests and making so even the ones who were not wealthy could attend without shame, the second was that it was a really popular pass time to attack wedding parties to rob the guests and carry off the bride for ransom.

Wearing the robe meant you were invited and honored.

If you did not want to wear the robe you were spitting in your host's face and breaking security.

[FES0844]

Soon the Bible will be banned. Maranatha!!

[Red Badger]

Matthew 22
New International Version
The Parable of the Wedding Banquet
22 Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. 3 He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.

4 “Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.’

5 “But they paid no attention and went off—one to his field, another to his business. 6 The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them. 7 The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.

8 “Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. 9 So go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.’ 10 So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, the bad as well as the good, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.

11 “But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 12 He asked, ‘How did you get in here without wedding clothes, friend?’ The man was speechless.

13 “Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

14 “For many are invited, but few are chosen.”

[farmguy]

I’m not a great Biblical scholar ... I just learned that 3 days ago.

[af_vet_1981]

It seems to me that Protestantism has failed. Will the offspring of the Protestant communities also fail ?

I notice his titles: Rev. Dr. Victor Aloyo. The Catholic Church is roundly criticized for its use of titles and honorifics, yet here we see the same thing. I've pondered this, not only as hypocrisy, but in trying to understand the context of these verses to derive the true course.

Psalm 111:9
He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name.

Should anyone else have the title Reverend precede his own name ?

Acts 5:34
Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;

Matthew 23:

1. Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2. Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
3. All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
4. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6. And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7. And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

So three titles were seemingly forbidden:
1. Rabbi
2. Father
3. Master from which is derived Mister

Yet the Apostle to the Gentiles, Paul calls himself a father of those he has fathered in the faith.

1 Corinthians 4:

14. I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
15. For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
16. Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.
17. For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.

And John used the term more broadly since none of these to whom he is writing fathered him in the Gospel. Perhaps the "fathers" to whom he writes have indeed fathered other sons in the Gospel. 1 John 2:

13. I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.
14. I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.

1. Did the Apostle Paul not know ?
2. Was the Messiah's teaching only to his Jewish disciples and not applicable to the Gentiles (they would not be called "Rabbi") ?
3. Why did at least Paul and John not take it literally ?

[Engedi]

What does the parable of the wedding garment mean?
These wedding garments were simple, nondescript robes that all attendees wore. In this way, rank or station was covered, so everyone at the feast could mingle as equals. Revelation 19:8 defines this symbol: The wedding garment identifies the righteous, those who lived according to God’s ways.

It has to do with dressing equally in same robes for everyone at a wedding so that there was no obvious ranking or station.

[Raymond Pamintuan]

What this “minister” doesn’t understand is we are saved individually, and once we die, that’s it; time’s up. If we are unprepared to meet God when we exit this earth, then no amount of whining afterward will change our eternal fate. If our own loved ones choose the wrong path, our love for them will not change their fate.

This is why it is so important for us to become “perfect” while still alive - and this perfection comes by us becoming people who genuinely love God, love our neighbors, love ourselves, and keep God’s commandments as best we can. Then and only then can we stand before a loving God with joy for as he is so were we while on this earth. Then and only then can we become one with him and share in his oneness, love, and glory.

[californian by choice]

clearer than water at a temperature of 4 degrees Celsius; He represents some of the guests who did not accept the invitation.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Anyone else here the least bit bothered by this stuff?

We recognize it as an apostate church that is no longer a Christian church.

Like any cancer, we cut it off from the body.

It tends to writhe around and sometimes strangely unites with other severed body parts as they die.

Very tragic.

[Morgana]

He does not understand that verse. That verse was explained to me once by someone who knew what it meant. It’s not talking about actual clothing to the wedding, it’s talking about being spiritually pure, free of sin to enter the kingdom of Heaven.

It sounds to me he does not know the meaning of that verse.

[lgjhn23]

Demonic