Shincheonji interprets olive oil in the parable of the Foolish and Wise Virgins as the word of testimony, and that in order to be saved, one must have enough olive oil in your jar in order to be prepared for Christ’s completion of the wedding banquet and the lamb.
The Physical Fulfillment of Revelation, pages 235 – 236
Applying this understanding of the word to the parable of the ten virgins, the lamp is the Bible that shines its light into our darkened hearts to enlighten our spirits. The olive oil that lights the lamp is the word of testimony from the two witnesses. Those who sell the olive oil are those who have the olive oil, the two witnesses. The wise virgins, who have the lamp and enough oil, are the believers who have received the testimony of the events of Revelation from the two witnesses and have held onto their words. The foolish virgins, who have the lamp but no oil, are those who have the Bible, but have not received the testimony regarding the fulfillment of a Revelation from the two witnesses.
Shincheonji makes a heavy emphasis on the testimony of the two witnesses of the fulfillment of Revelation, as their witness is essential for a person’s salvation.
When reviewing the parable through the lens of SCJ, many contradictions begin to arise.
Conclusion
The parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins, when interpreted through Shincheonji’s (SCJ) theological lens, highlights significant contradictions and inconsistencies. SCJ’s emphasis on the testimony of the two witnesses, the role of Lee Man-hee, and the indispensability of the oil sellers fails to align with the plain reading of the parable and broader biblical teaching.
Firstly, SCJ’s interpretation of sleep as either spiritual ignorance or death is undermined by the parable itself, which states that both the wise and foolish virgins fell asleep. The distinction lies not in their wakefulness but in their preparedness, emphasizing the sufficiency of faith and prior readiness over ongoing works. Attempts to equate sleep with physical death raise further theological issues, especially when considered alongside SCJ’s teaching on eternal life in the flesh and resurrection.
Secondly, SCJ’s interpretation of the olive oil as the word of testimony creates theological paradoxes. If selling represents teaching, the Wise Virgins, with their supposed deeper understanding, should have been able to share their oil. SCJ’s shifting definitions of the olive oil—sometimes as the word of testimony, other times as internalized understanding—reflect an inconsistent framework. Furthermore, the notion that the oil might “run out” contradicts the biblical portrayal of God’s wisdom and grace as abundant and inexhaustible.
Thirdly, SCJ’s elevation of the oil sellers as the two witnesses introduces further complications. The parable omits the oil sellers from the final scene, raising questions about their supposed indispensability. The silence surrounding their salvation challenges SCJ’s claim that they are integral to the fulfillment of Revelation. Additionally, SCJ’s acknowledgment of the fallibility of these figures—one betraying God and the other making mistakes—further undermines their credibility as essential conduits for salvation.
Ultimately, the parable emphasizes personal readiness and individual accountability, underscoring the sufficiency of faith in Christ and the direct work of the Holy Spirit in believers. SCJ’s reliance on intermediaries, shifting interpretations, and theological inconsistencies not only fail to uphold the biblical message but also create unnecessary barriers to understanding the gospel’s simplicity and grace. The parable points to the centrality of Christ, rejecting any framework that seeks to replace His role with human intermediaries or flawed interpretations.