The Parable of the Wedding Feast

You always equate the covenant promise of Abraham’s seed being as numerous as the sands of the sea and the stars of the heavens with the multitude in Revelation 7:9 that no man can number standing before the throne of the Lamb clothed in white robes. And now you say that few are chosen. So which is it; a multitude or few?

I think you can say both depending on the context. Compared to how many people there are at a given time, I think only few are chosen during most times. If you are talking about the span of history, there is no problem with say a multitude. I think both are said in the Bible and how each is meant depends on the context of the counting

Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount uses the same distinction of 'many' vs 'few' with respect to those who enter into life and those who do not…

“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it” [Matthew 7:13-14].


The total number of the elect is given in a symbol for completeness and perfection [based on the New Jerusalem of Revelation 21:17] in the Revelation 7 and 14 references to 144000. Compared to the total number of men from every generation of man the number of elect might be considered few, but taken together as a group they are a multitude that no man can number.

Consider Noah in his generation; consider Israel among the nations; consider the beginnings of the early NT church; consider today the number of those who abide in the doctrine of Christ compared to those who profess to know Him.

What are you talking about?

I have to respectfully disagree regarding the 144,000. If you will note, there are two groups of God's people mentioned in that section of Revelation. There is the 144,000 and there are the multitudes of those from every nation who were martyred. From my reading, I think the 144,000 refers to those who were kept safe, not through rapture, from the martyrdom while the other were not. Let me know what you think.

Mount Zion is the heavenly Jerusalem [Hebrews 12:22], the holy city, the church and the bride of Christ…

‘Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Father’s name written on their foreheads…They sang as it were a new song before the throne…and no one could learn that song except the hundred and forty-four thousand who were redeemed from the earth…These were redeemed from among men, being firstfruits to God and to the Lamb. And in their mouth was found no deceit, for they are without fault before the throne of God.’ [Revelation 14: 1-5]

The church is made up of the redeemed; these are the ones faithful toward their bride groom.

The language used here to describe the holy city is similar to the symbolic language of the 144,000 and defines its significance…

“Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, having the glory of God…she had a great and high wall with twelve gates…and names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel…Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb...And he measured the city with the reed: twelve thousand furlongs. Its length, breadth, and height are equal. Then he measured its wall: one hundred and forty-four cubits…’ [Revelation 21]

The holy city has 12 gates for the 12 tribes of Israel, signifying the OT church and 12 foundations for the 12 apostles, signifying the NT church. The whole of God’s elect people are spoken of here in glorious language indicating their completeness and perfection. The everlasting covenant of grace is complete in that Christ has redeemed a people for His own possession [Titus 2] given to Him by the Father and regenerated by the Spirit.

Yes, you are correct that two groups are mentioned. The question is whether the descriptions are of the same group or different groups. I am in the same group camp for the reasons given to WWM.

The everlasting covenant includes the OT and NT peoples saved by grace through faith.

Your explanations are right on, in my opinion, ValiantForTruth, and you’re also correct to assume that both groups are one and the same.

ALL Christians, caday5, from the beginning of time to the end, are “martyrs” in the eyes of God. That can be derived from the following verses.

Luke 21:17
And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.

1 John 3:15
Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer.

If all Christians are hated, then all Christians are murdered every day of the year by the ungodly. Once again, caday5, I’m going by God’s standard.

Gary Gordon

I look at the two groups as being distinct with the minority group receiving God's protection showing his sovereignty while the majority group showing God's glory by being martyrs.

I also see, and tell me if you think this is too much, a parallel between the Church in Philadelphia who was to be spared the tribulation from the other churches who are not offered such protection

Where did Jesus say "the old covenant is not good anymore"? Jesus did say that he did not come to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfill. He didn't say anything previous to him doesn't stand any longer.

Back to our last discussion, we are called the bride of Christ when he returns. That is the wedding Jesus was given that parable about. He clearly said many are called and few are chosen to be there. He didn't say all of those there are chosen or even called to be there. There will clearly be a multitude that will be at this wedding that was neither called or chosen. Can't be more clearer than that.

"wedding Jesus was *giving* that parable"

Thanks for your visit and comment.

We have the same authority and I believe you are sincere in your views, wanting to follow the Scriptures. I assume that you grant me the same or you would not be here.

I would like to deal with your question regarding the Old Covenant because I think this has a bearing on our understanding of the parable.

Where did Jesus say "the old covenant is not good anymore"? –Jesse


Will you look at Hebrews 8:13 in the context of Hebrews 8 and give us your understanding of this passage?

In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. [Hebrews 8:13]

Do you not believe that the OT temple worship with its bloody animal sacrificial system is forever obsolete given that Christ has come and sacrificed Himself once for all time for sin?



With regard to the Wedding Feast Parable, will you explain your understanding of Matthew 22:7?

“When the king heard it, he was angry, and sent his soldiers, and slew these murderers, and burnt up their city.” [Matthew 22:7]

Do you not believe this is a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, when the temple was also destroyed?

It was just that. The old way of asking for forgiveness was gone. Jesus shed his blood so there was nothing between man and God any longer. He did say he didn't destroy the law or the prophets. If he didn't destroy the law or the prophets, but merely fulfilled them, didn't they still stand? You didn't have an explanation for that.

What is new about the New Covenant?

That with Christ's blood there is a possibility of forgiveness through the Holy Spirit. That those that believe on Him will have everlasting life.

Getting back to something you said earlier about the temple being destroyed in 70 AD. You're way off, with all due respect. That parable was about the unbelievers who would not be at the wedding because they didn't believe. People who mocked the king for inviting them to the wedding. Aren't all invited to become Christians? Wait, I forgot. Only those who are Christians were destined to be. If they couldn't come, then why invite them? Again another question about all Christians being chosen, but that could go on and on. How do those mocking the king have to do with what happened to the temple? At the very best you can come up with is that Jesus was mocked, but he wasn't mocked for inviting them to his wedding. So, how does that translate into where I think you're going with this? If this is what the Reformed Church teaches, then I am sorely disappointed. No wonder Caday is so lost and believes the Jews still have it coming. This is my last visit. Sorry.

Again, you misrepresent what I have said.

Thanks for the visit. The doctrine of election and the meaning of the wedding feast parable are NOT points of fellowship with me. Take care.

What do you mean that election is not a point of fellowship? Why then is it always coming up here?

Jesse "The Mind" Norman

When it comes to understanding God’s election, this is your biggest mistake, when you say things like, “Aren't all invited to BECOME Christians?” Or “If they couldn't come, then why invite them?”

Your mistake is in thinking that men can become something they’re not.

You do believe the Scriptures, don’t you, when it asks the rhetorical question, “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. Jeremiah 13:23.

The Word of God does not invite all men to BECOME Christians. Rather, the Word of God is a light unto the world. Its purpose is to shine a light on all men, thereby showing men what they ALREADY are.

The elect are scattered throughout the world, hence the call goes out to all men throughout the world. The purpose of the calling, then, is to show all men the way, but God has ordained it so that only His elect (those predestined from before the foundation of the world) will see the way and come to him.

One Scripture supporting what I say that men remain as they are is found in the last chapter of the last book of the Bible, right after the Apostle John is told NOT to seal up the Word of God, but the time is at hand for it to go out into the world:

“He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.” Rev 22:11.

The Word of God is a two edged sword. It cuts both ways. It shows mercy and also hardens. Its purpose is to divide the sheep from the goats, not create sheep out of goats.

You have trouble understanding “what is the purpose of this world” if God does not give men a choice to choose? God’s purpose in this world is to divide the sheep from the goats and then gather both.

Gary Gordon

When did we visit you in prison, feed you when you were hungry and so forth? One of the signs of receiving God's righteousness in Christ is to disavow one's own righteousness. Those who had rejected Jesus did so because they sought to establish their own righteousness.