Talk:Parable of the Tares

message: "Some Historians" it should be noted are the very tares that this parable warns about.  This is a Biblical Christian Writing and there are many non-Christians who would call themselves Authorities and intentionaly alter other peoples Religions through their re-interpretation of our History. They also would love for us to drop sections from our Bibles and adopt Non-Canonical writings like the Nag Hammadi in thier place. Turning the Bibles truth into a book of fables and lies that agree with thier lines of thinking. 
This Parable was written to warn us of this type of people that would be in our midst... 
Truth trodden under foot is still the truth.
--189.70.211.165 (talk) 17:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  User comments moved from the Attribution section 

message: The entry on the parable of the wheat & the tares is really only a "stem."  The authors correctly state that interpretation of the parable is complex; then they completely gloss over the complexities.  This parable has a rich & controversial history of interpretation, with important theological & political implications.  Among the commentators are the Gospel writer of Matthew himself, Augustine of Hippo & Martin Luther.  A more thorough (& more accurate) entry is needed, & I am not competent to supply it.71.3.79.187 15:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parable of the Weeds 

message: Okay, so if the King James Version uses the word weeds repeatedly, then why does the page name the parable after tares?  Is this some new age wording?  -Gomm 22:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer is quite simple - the KJV doesn't use the word weeds. Although both quotations from Matthew claimed to be KJV, the second one was, the first one wasn't. It is now! --rossb 11:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are other translations predating the King James Version, including "Darnel" and "Cockle", while most modern translations state "Weeds". The only consensus among all the translations is that "Darnel", "Cockle", and "Tares" are all "Weeds". I've created a draft page, and vote to move this page to the new "The Parable of the Weeds" page; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Parable_of_the_Weeds.  Universal Constants (talk) 20:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tares, Darnel, & Cockle are all Weeds 

message: The following warning ...  ... has been appended at the top of the Attribution section, plus various inline warnings. 
Unless the whole section is cleared up, I propose to remove the article's section altogether. 
This section of the Talk Page is specifically for discussing this issue.Miguel de Servet (talk) 12:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warnings appended to the "Attribution" section 

message: "According to the common interpretation, the good seeds are the spiritual children of Jesus Christ and the weeds are the rest of the population of the Earth that are the spiritual children of Satan."
Common to whom? Certain subsets of self-identified Christians? Not, I submit, to the author of the parable, who never referred to his children, spiritual or otherwise, let alone used such a phrase as code for adherents to a religion. Nor to any objective reader. The idea that Jesus of Nazareth consigned "the rest of the population of the Earth" to hell, rather than specific evildoers, is not only textually insupportable, it is an abhorrently grotesque understanding of his reported teachings. This POV failure, in the lead paragraph no less, beggars belief. Michael (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interpretation: "Common" or sectarian?