Fiery Furnace: A symbol or a literal?

by MercyBrew 6 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  MercyBrew

  Matt. 13: 24 - 30 contains a parable spoken by the Lord Jesus himself. In it Jesus spoke of a symbolic sower who sowed symbolic seeds in a symbolic field. He also spoke of a symbolic enemy who came and oversowed them with symbolic weeds. The symbols culminate in a symbolic gathering of the weeds at the time of a symbolic harvest by symbolic reapers who burn them up.

  Verse 36 records that the disciples came up to Jesus privately after and desired the interpretation of this parable. And from the next verse, Jesus answers as follows:

  “The sower of the fine seed is the Son of man; the field is the world. As for the fine seed, these are the sons of the Kingdom, but the weeds are the sons of the wicked one, and the enemy who sowed them is the Devil. The harvest is a conclusion of a system of things, and the reapers are angels. Therefore, just as the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be in the conclusion of the system of things. The Son of man will send his angels, and they will collect out from his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness, and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace." NWT

  From Jesus' response we see him meticulously interpreting the key symbols in the parable. Sower as himself, field as the world, fine seed as the sons of the kingdom, weeds as the sons of the wicked one. etc. My particular focus is his interpretation of the burning of the the weeds with fire, which he interprets as "pitching all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness into fiery furnace." If all the interpretations have been literal up to this point, why do JW say fiery furnace is still a symbol?

  To confirm the fiery furnace as a consistent literal interpretation that does not derive itself from the symbol of fire but is independently a real literal that could be symbolized without the use of fire, Jesus further spoke another parable in 49 - 50 with a totally different set of symbols that did not allude to fire at all. Yet when he would interpret the parable he refers to the fiery furnace again in the interpretation of the symbols relating to the throwing away of the unsuitable catch of a fishing dragnet.

  Why would JWs still then claim that fiery furnace is a symbol and not a literal?
• 

  StarTrekAngel

  You lost me at "all interpretations have been literal up to this point"

  If the elements mentioned, like the seeds and the weeds, were not understood to be literal seeds or weed but rather symbolic representations of people and events, then is not literal, is symbolic. Then the fire should be symbolic as well. Wether it represents total destruction or represent eternal punishment, I would not debate but the fire isn't literal in my view, is just another symbol.
• 

  Island Man

  I don't know about the rest of the NT but I must say that the author of Revelation clearly teaches torment in fire. Revelation explicitly talks about the false prophet being tormented in the lake of fire forever. There's no getting around it.

  I don't believe hell or eternal torment is real. But I would be lying if I said the author of Revelation doesn't believe. The JWs' attempts at dismissing the reference to eternal torment in fire, in the book of Revelation, come off as disingenuous spin-doctoring to deny the obvious.

  The fiery furnace in Matthew could be symbolic of destruction. I can definitely see how that argument can be made in the context of the fact that the wheat, weeds and fishes are also symbolic. But because Revelation talks about being tormented in the lake of fire day and night - this has to be referring to some kind of literal eternal torture.
  
• 

  MercyBrew

  StarTrekAngel

  You lost me at "all interpretations have been literal up to this point"
  

  I really find it hard to understand how you missed my point.

  The disciples asked Jesus for "INTERPRETATION" so Jesus interpreted as follows:

  Symbol | Literal

  Sower | Son of Man

  Field | The World

  Fine seed | The Sons of the Kingdom

  Weeds | The Sons of the Wicked One

  The Enemy | The Devil

  The Harvest | The conclusion of a system of things

  The Reapers | Angels

  My statement: "if all the interpretations (note I said interpretations not elements of the parable) have been literal up to this point" refers to the above. In other words, if the Son of Man is a literal interpretation of the "Sower" element in the parable and not further symbolic of anything after. Similarly, the World, Angels, Sons of the Kingdom, etc. are all literal interpretations to the elements Jesus identified them with in his parable. We are not expected to further consider them symbolic of anything. They are to be taken at face value. They literally mean exactly what they mean. JWs also take all these element interpretations Jesus gave up to this point as literal and do not attempt to make them symbolic of anything. Why do they then reject "fiery furnace" being a literal interpretation? Why do they find the need to make it symbolic when Jesus meant it as interpretation.

  Jesus said: "just as the weeds (symbolic element) are collected and burned with fire (symbolic element),..they will collect out from his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness (literal interpretation of weeds), and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace (literal interpretation of burning with fire"

  Fiery furnace was not mentioned in the parable, rather burning with fire is the element in the parable. Jesus however interpreted that "burning of weeds in fire" as "pitching all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness into fiery furnace." This part therefore should also be understood literally. That is my point
• 

  MercyBrew

  Island Man

  Thank you for your sincerity in separating your personal belief from evidence. You do not believe in a literal place of eternal torment but you cannot deny that it is explicitly taught in the book of Revelation.

  I do not agree with you that The fiery furnace in Matthew could be symbolic of destruction Like you later admitted, the context does not allow taking one interpretation out of many and making it symbolic, more especially when the particular interpretation is repeated for another set of symbolic elements. There can be no missing its finality as a literal thing.

  Why would Jesus give interpretation to all the key elements of his parable except one? Why would he do so twice with the same interpretation when the symbol sets differ? If he had left the "burning with fire" part uninterpreted then we could suggest that he assumed it was obvious that it means destruction, as weed burned in fire naturally gets destroyed.

  He however did not do so. He rather interpreted it as "pitching people who practise lawlessness in fiery furnace." To avoid us coming up with the impression that the fiery furnace would destroy like natural fire destroys weeds, he adds:

  "THERE is WHERE their weeping and the gnashing of their teeth will be."

  That is unmistakably a description of a place and not a state/condition. It is also a description of torment.

  As Jesus charged in closing: "Let the one who has ears listen"
• 

  Mephis

  They're not alone in their view of it being a metaphorical fiery furnace. The problem is that they also reject the idea of it being a reference to hellfire/eternal damnation etc etc. It's not the only reference in Matthew to the whole thing either - Matthew 8:12 gives a similar sort of place.

  Not a believer in the slightest, but I can't think of way to get Matthew 13:42 to fit JW doctrine without excessive use of derp. But then JW doctrine does this sort of thing a lot. It's doctrine by selective, context free, quotation.There's no internally consistent way in which they use canon scripture. Everything is literal until it's too inconvenient, and then those bits need interpretation back to what the writer really meant which miraculously always turns out to fit JW doctrine. Praise Jehovah. That approach is even set out as one of the things they did for the recent NWT revisions.
• 

  MercyBrew

  Mephis

  Thank you for your comment. I am quite aware of JWs and other groups that share the no literal hell fire judgment for the wicked doctrine. I am also aware of Matt 8:12 and a few other similar passages. I chose this passage in Matt 13 because it leaves no room for not taking "fiery furnace" as literal. The context provides symbolic elements and their explicit interpretations. While many of the other passages could be argued as symbolic speech, this cannot.

  I have confronted JWs in person with it and received no answer. I just hope it helps someone see the falsehood in WT's position and the danger it poses to their eternal well being.

  Like I usually say, if JWs are right on this then I've got something to lose but nothing to suffer if I do not subscribe to becoming a member of their faith. If however they are wrong, then they have everything to lose and all eternity to suffer, For this reason I always plead with JWs to free their minds and think for themselves.

  Jesus said: "that slave who understood the will of his master but did not get ready or do what he asked will be beaten with many strokes. But the one who did not understand and yet did things deserving of strokes will be beaten with few." Lk. 12: 47, 48 (NWT)

  So in the last day, no one will be excused or escape punishment because of ignorance in the name of being faithful to WT and trusting their interpretation. Each of us will render an account for himself to God. Rom.14: 12 (NWT)