1. A new method. Matthew 13 took place on “that
same day” of rejection (v.
1) as Matthew
12:22-50. On that day Jesus began to teach by the
new method of parables (Matt.
13:3, 10). Although parables can be used as illustrations
to make the truth plainer to all, that was not His purpose.
Instead, in part His purpose was to hide truth (vv. 9-17).
“Why do you speak to the people in parables?” His
disciples asked. “He replied, ‘The knowledge of
the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you,
but not to them’” (vv. 10-11).
This new method of teaching was, therefore, a deliberate judgment,
a method that would reveal truth to some but hide it from others.
Only those with spiritual ears would really hear (vv. 9,
13, 15, 16); others would go their way uninformed. This
was a main teaching of the first parable.

2. New truths about the kingdom. “Secrets”
(KJV “mysteries”) were truths not revealed before
(Rom. 16:25-26).
These new truths had to do with the kingdom. But remember that
the Lord had not defined the kingdom; He had announced it as
something already known. And what definition had the Jews acquired
from the prophecies? That the kingdom would be the rule of David
restored. The “former dominion” (Micah
4:8) would come back to Jerusalem, far more glorious than
before. The stone would drop down from heaven and become an
earth-filling mountain (Dan.
2:34-35, 44-45). This kingdom was being announced
as having “drawn near”; in fact, in the Person and
works of Jesus it had touched upon the earth. And His miracles
showed that the kingdom would be all that the prophets had said.
Yet the people refused to repent and believe. Therefore Messiah
revealed the secrets. There are eight such parables in Matthew
13 and several in later chapters (see below).

3. A
new kingdom? Did these newly revealed
secrets change the meaning of the kingdom or introduce a new form of
it? In other words, did Israel’s rejection of the King cause
the kingdom itself to be transformed? Our answer to this will
affect our interpretation of a great many passages to the end of the
New Testament.

The
simplest answer is one that harmonizes with all the facts: The
kingdom was not changed at all but simply—from man’s
point of view—“postponed.” God was revealing for
the first time that there would be an interval between Messiah’s
sufferings and Messiah’s glory. The unforeseen interval
is the age in which we live, when the church is being built. Why
then, if He was revealing an interim age, did He call such
revelations “secrets of the kingdom”? For the simple
reason that the new age was part of His kingdom plan. All He would
do in the present age would be bound up with the future coming of the
kingdom.

This explains why He calls the seed He sows “the message
about the kingdom” (Matt.
13:19). Was such seed sown only during His earthly life?
Did He not preach the same message through His apostles (Acts
20:25; 28:23,
31; cf. Matt.
24:14)? This is why He calls the wheat “the sons of
the kingdom” (Matt.
13:38). Because even believers today will be heirs of the
promised kingdom (James
2:5)—as the Jews thought they were (Matt.
8:12).

Therefore,
there is no need to believe that the “secrets of the kingdom”
reveal a new form of the kingdom. Instead, they refer to the new age
that is intimately bound to the kingdom and leads to it. Can this
interpretation be substantiated in the parables? Yes, it can.

4. The kingdom clearly future in some parables. Sometimes
the Lord’s parables leave no doubt that the kingdom is
still future. Look, for example, at the parable of The Talents
(Matt. 25:14-30).
There it is not until the “master” returns from
his journey, that he puts his faithful servants “in
charge of many things” (vv.
21, 23). That refers to authority in the future kingdom,
as verified in the parallel Parable of the Ten Minas in Luke
19:11-27. There the master “went to a distant
country to have himself appointed king and then to return”
(19:12).
After “he was made king…and returned home” (v.
15), he put his faithful servants in charge of cities (vv.
17, 19).

That return of the master is the setting for the next passage
in Matthew. This is the story—not a parable—about
The Sheep and the Goats (Matt.
25:31-46). In it the Lord speaks of His future coming
“in his glory, and all the angels with him, [to] sit on
his throne in heavenly glory” (v.
31). As King He invites the “sheep” into their
“inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you” (v.
34), which is the same as “eternal life” (v.
46). Thus, the kingdom (and eternal life) is clearly future,
at the Lord’s Second Coming. Notice that He mentions the
same elements in Matthew
19:28-29.

5. The kingdom can be future in all parables. What
about the parable of The Wheat and the Weeds, which the Lord
Himself interprets? In Matthew
13:37-39 He identifies seven items of this parable.
For example, the sown field is “the world” (v.
38), and the wheat (“the good seed”) are “the
sons of the kingdom” (v.
38). But He identifies none of these seven things as the
kingdom itself. He first mentions the kingdom as being present
in connection with the harvest at “the end of the age”
(v. 39):
then the angels “will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling-blocks,
and those who commit lawlessness” (v.
41, NASB). When this separation has been made, “then
the righteous [earlier called the “sons of the kingdom”]
will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father”
(v. 43).

It is true that the words “gather out of His kingdom”
could be understood to imply that the kingdom had existed previously.
But more likely they mean that His first step in inaugurating
the kingdom is to purge undesirable elements from it. This would
agree with everything else in the parable and the fact that
the age to come is the age of the kingdom (cf. Matt.
12:32; Eph.
1:21; Heb.
2:5).

Put
yourself in the disciples’ place. The Lord had not told them
that the kingdom would assume a new form. Therefore, in this parable
they would look for a kingdom like the one that had been prophesied.
They would find it where it was first mentioned as being present, at
the time of the harvest. In other words, since Jesus said nothing to
make them redefine the kingdom, they would understand it as they had
before.

The same rule should be followed in all the parables of the
kingdom. Look for the kingdom where the disciples would: in
the grand climax. Thus, it is not in the dragnet being pulled
through the water, but after it is drawn to shore (13:47-50);
not in the mustard seed when sown, but after it becomes a tree
(13:3l-32);
not in the process of inviting to the wedding of the king’s
son, but in the wedding itself (22:1-14);
not while the virgins wait, but when the groom arrives (25:1-12).

6. “The kingdom is like.” Many of the “secrets”
parables are introduced by the expression “the kingdom
of heaven is like.” This follows a common Jewish method
of introducing parables, and means, “Here is a parable
about the kingdom.” Normally, the first thing mentioned
after this introduction cannot be the kingdom—for example,
the “man” in 13:24,
45; 18:23;
20:1;
22:2;
25:14;
or the “ten virgins” in 25:1.
If the kingdom is not usually the first thing mentioned, where,
then, do we find it? Each person will use the same method the
disciples used in finding it—namely, where his prior definition
leads him. If he begins with the right definition, he will end
right, seeing the kingdom in the grand climax.

7. Each parable was understandable to the disciples at
that time. At least they understood the main points. Suggested
under keys 5 and 6, this key was clearly stated in Matthew
13:51-52:

(a) The Lord asked, “Have you understood all these
things?”

(b) They
replied, “Yes.”

(c) His response, beginning with “Therefore,”
accepted their reply as correct.

Accordingly, no interpretation is likely unless the disciples
could have understood it at that stage. This rule disqualifies
some of the interpretations given nowadays, such as, the treasure
being the church or the pearl being Israel. The disciples’
preconceptions about the kingdom also make it unlikely that
they would understand the mustard tree (v.
32) or the fully leavened dough (v.
33) as “bad.” Both figures were quite capable
of “good” meanings. For example, Ezekiel
17:22–24 used a similar description of a tree symbolizing
a good kingdom. And yeast, though it sometimes symbolized evil
(1 Cor. 5:6–8),
could simply picture the permeating quality of teaching.[note
1] That seemed to be the point of the Lord’s warning
about “the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees”
(Matt. 16:6,
12) and His description of His own teaching here. The disciples
had no reason to think that the kingdom would be contaminated.
Instead, they pictured it as still future and glorious, similar
to the tree and the fully leavened dough. Test the “good”
interpretations for these two parables in Luke
13:18-21. The context for them there makes a negative meaning
even less likely.

In conclusion,
what was Jesus revealing in the “secrets” of the kingdom? Neither
a transformed kingdom nor a different form of it. Instead, a previously unannounced
period of waiting for the same future and glorious kingdom already predicted.
Starting with these secrets, it became ever more obvious that Messiah would
come not once but twice! Like the writers of the New Testament, we are still
waiting for Him and His kingdom.

http://www.kingdominbible.com/wordpress/wp-admin/post-new.php?post_type=page