WoF and the Winnowing Fork

tbeachhead

Well-known member
In Luke 3, John the Baptist is preaching, and one of the memorable things he said has always intrigued me.

15The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John could be the Christ. 16John answered all of them: “I baptize you with water, but One more powerful than I will come, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."

Is he speaking of three baptisms here, his and then two from Jesus? Is the baptism of Jesus both simultaneously? Or is one subsequent to the other?

But, then, he also says this: 17His winnowing fork is in His hand to clear His threshing floor and to gather the wheat into His barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

This raises several questions for those who have never brought in a harvest by hand:

  • What is the purpose of a “winnowing fork”?
  • What does it mean to “winnow wheat”?
  • What do you “clear the threshing floor” of?
  • What is chaff?
  • Is chaff evil?

    ...and...
  • Can you have wheat without first having chaff?
  • Why or why not?

What could be the “chaff” that was once necessary for growth that is left behind at the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

David Duplessis, known as "Father Pentecost", came to my little A/G church in Ashtabula, OH in the very early eighties, at the height of the Charismatic renewal. One thing he said has gripped me ever since. I still hear him say it with his Scottish accent: "Chaff is not sin. Chaff is chaff. You can't have wheat without the chaff. And once the wheat is ripe, the chaff has no more purpose, and is fit to be burned.

In that light, the Pharisees and the Sadducees, the entire Jewish Orthodoxy, were as essential to the church as Jesus, in that without the preservation of the Word to which they had dedicated themselves, there would have been no Israel to whom Jesus should come. Note, once Jesus came, they were cast aside, ostensibly burned.

The chaff is as essential to the development of the seed, as the seed itself is essential to the future of the crop.

That's probably why the critics' role is so vital to the Church.
 
Last edited:
In Luke 3, John the Baptist is preaching, and one of the memorable things he said has always intrigued me.

15The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John could be the Christ. 16John answered all of them: “I baptize you with water, but One more powerful than I will come, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."
Looking at my various translations, they seem to be divided about the 2nd "with" (or "in" or "by") should it be there or not? AFV, ABP, & BIB do not have "en" before "pur" (fire). It may be the 2nd "en" is assumed in Greek ;I don't know. But it looks like it's "holy-spirit-and-fire".
Is he speaking of three baptisms here, his and then two from Jesus? Is the baptism of Jesus both simultaneously? Or is one subsequent to the other?
Looking at Acts 2, it seems the Holy Spirit came with fire, so they seem to be simultaneous. Then there's Paul's experience with the Ephesians(?) where they had been baptised with John's baptism only. No mention of fire there...

--Rich
 
Looking at my various translations, they seem to be divided about the 2nd "with" (or "in" or "by") should it be there or not? AFV, ABP, & BIB do not have "en" before "pur" (fire). It may be the 2nd "en" is assumed in Greek ;I don't know. But it looks like it's "holy-spirit-and-fire".

Looking at Acts 2, it seems the Holy Spirit came with fire, so they seem to be simultaneous. Then there's Paul's experience with the Ephesians(?) where they had been baptised with John's baptism only. No mention of fire there...

--Rich
Do you believe the tongues of fire is the fire to which John was referring? As that manifestation is described only once, I do not think of that fire as "the" fire. Jesus spoke of a baptism to which he was about to be baptized...and extended that experience to James and John as in their future.

What do you think the chaff is that is to be burned once the wheat is safe in the barn?
 
Do you believe the tongues of fire is the fire to which John was referring?
Anachronistically? No. Prophetically? Maybe. Was John speaking metaphorically? That could also be.
As that manifestation is described only once, I do not think of that fire as "the" fire. Jesus spoke of a baptism to which he was about to be baptized...and extended that experience to James and John as in their future.
Could be. This is all hypothetical to me, and I'm not in love with my hypotheses! ?
What do you think the chaff is that is to be burned once the wheat is safe in the barn?
Whatever is Left Behind? ?
But in any case, it is most important to be the wheat, not the tares nor chaff!

--Rich
 
Anachronistically? No. Prophetically? Maybe. Was John speaking metaphorically? That could also be.

Could be. This is all hypothetical to me, and I'm not in love with my hypotheses! ?
I agree. I never trade in theory.

Faith that isn't tried is only guesswork and theory.
Whatever is Left Behind? ?
But in any case, it is most important to be the wheat, not the tares nor chaff!

--Rich
That's just it...Chaff is not analogous to tares, and I always believed it was, until Duplessis pointed out that "...you cannot have wheat without the chaff." The chaff is the conduit for the life of the seed, and its development right up to the harvest.

The wheat is never dependent on the tares, but it's entirely dependent on the chaff. That's what struck me as brilliant...and well-hidden.
 
In Luke 3, John the Baptist is preaching, and one of the memorable things he said has always intrigued me.

15The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John could be the Christ. 16John answered all of them: “I baptize you with water, but One more powerful than I will come, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."

Is he speaking of three baptisms here, his and then two from Jesus? Is the baptism of Jesus both simultaneously? Or is one subsequent to the other?

But, then, he also says this: 17His winnowing fork is in His hand to clear His threshing floor and to gather the wheat into His barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

This raises several questions for those who have never brought in a harvest by hand:

  • What is the purpose of a “winnowing fork”?
  • What does it mean to “winnow wheat”?
  • What do you “clear the threshing floor” of?
  • What is chaff?
  • Is chaff evil?

    ...and...
  • Can you have wheat without first having chaff?
  • Why or why not?

The winnowing fork separates the wheat from the Chaff. Biblically, the winnowing fork separates people from their evil. The Chaff is evil, see Psalm 1:4, and false doctrine, see Jeremiah 23:28.

Like any analogy, people will eventually take it beyond its intended meaning looking for hidden meanings or answers...
 
The winnowing fork separates the wheat from the Chaff. Biblically, the winnowing fork separates people from their evil. The Chaff is evil, see Psalm 1:4, and false doctrine, see Jeremiah 23:28.

You missed my point, Joe. Chaff is not sin. You cannot have wheat without the chaff. Chaff is not evil, in fact it's life giving until it is no longer, and then comes the winnowing, not before, lest you destroy the life of the seed. Evil is not essential to growth, but structure and life-giving support is.

Like any analogy, people will eventually take it beyond its intended meaning looking for hidden meanings or answers...
Or they'll misunderstand it altogether...and talk like it's the folks who know that the wheat grows on the stem until harvest are the misinformed.
 
You missed my point, Joe. Chaff is not sin. You cannot have wheat without the chaff. Chaff is not evil, in fact it's life giving until it is no longer, and then comes the winnowing, not before, lest you destroy the life of the seed. Evil is not essential to growth, but structure and life-giving support is.

I got your point. You asked questions quoting scripture. From a Biblical perspective, you are wrong...

Psalm 1:4 The ungodly are not so,
But are like the chaff which the wind drives away.

Ungodly sinners are equated with chaff.

Jeremiah 23:28-30
New King James Version
28 “The prophet who has a dream, let him tell a dream;
And he who has My word, let him speak My word faithfully.
What is the chaff to the wheat?” says the Lord.
29 “Is not My word like a fire?” says the Lord,
“And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?

30 “Therefore behold, I am against the prophets,” says the Lord, “who steal My words everyone from his neighbor.

False Prophets, like those in the Word Faith Movement, are equated with chaff.

Or they'll misunderstand it altogether...and talk like it's the folks who know that the wheat grows on the stem until harvest are the misinformed.

Scripture trumps worldly wisdom

4 The ungodly are not so,
But are like the chaff which the wind drives away.
 
I got your point. You asked questions quoting scripture. From a Biblical perspective, you are wrong...

Psalm 1:4 The ungodly are not so,
But are like the chaff which the wind drives away.

Ungodly sinners are equated with chaff.
Oh.

And what's chaff, Joe?

Jeremiah 23:28-30
New King James Version
28 “The prophet who has a dream, let him tell a dream;
And he who has My word, let him speak My word faithfully.
What is the chaff to the wheat?” says the Lord.
Answer that question. It's a good one.
29 “Is not My word like a fire?” says the Lord,
“And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?
Yes it is...In case you were wondering. Now answer this: What is the fire to the chaff?

30 “Therefore behold, I am against the prophets,” says the Lord, “who steal My words everyone from his neighbor.

False Prophets, like those in the Word Faith Movement, are equated with chaff.
No...actually, Joe. You're adding to scripture.



Scripture trumps worldly wisdom

4 The ungodly are not so,
But are like the chaff which the wind drives away.
What is the chaff, Joe? And what is the chaff to the wheat?

Immaturity is a part of life...it's only at harvest that the fire happens. Chaff has it's purpose, without which you will not get wheat.

It's all about language, and biology. Not about "worldly wisdom."
 
Back
Top