The Parable of the Sower, 1-23
13:1 On that day after Jesus went out of the house, he sat by the lake. 13:2 And such a large crowd gathered around him that he got into a boat to sit while the whole crowd stood on the shore.
The parable of the Sower occupies an important place in our Lord’s teaching. (a) It is one of the longer parables; (b) It comes with our Lord’s own explanation; (c) It was spoken at a critical time in his ministry, when his hearers were being challenged to respond decisively to his call; (d) It may be seen as a key to the other parables.
He got into a boat – Is there an undesigned coincidence here? The Received Text inserts the definite article, ‘suggesting that there was a definite ship known to, or owned by, the disciples during Jesus’ ministry. This would make sense given their background (cf. Matt 4:22; Jn 21:3). This fits with Jesus’ request for a small vessel to be ready for him (Mk 3:9), and Jesus using a ship owned by Simon in Luke 5:3, which might well be ‘the ship’ later referred to in 8:22.’ But, given the weakness of the textual reading, we should be hesitant about drawing this inference from it.
13:3 He told them many things in parables, saying: “Listen! A sower went out to sow. 13:4 And as he sowed, some seeds fell along the path, and the birds came and devoured them. 13:5 Other seeds fell on rocky ground where they did not have much soil. They sprang up quickly because the soil was not deep. 13:6 But when the sun came up, they were scorched, and because they did not have sufficient root, they withered. 13:7 Other seeds fell among the thorns, and they grew up and choked them. 13:8 But other seeds fell on good soil and produced grain, some a hundred times as much, some sixty, and some thirty. 13:9 The one who has ears had better listen!”
13:10 Then the disciples came to him and said, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” 13:11 He replied, “You have been given the opportunity to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but they have not. 13:12 For whoever has will be given more, and will have an abundance. But whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.
13:13 For this reason I speak to them in parables: Although they see they do not see, and although they hear they do not hear nor do they understand. 13:14 And concerning them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:
‘You will listen carefully yet will never understand,
you will look closely yet will never comprehend.
13:15 For the heart of this people has become dull;
they are hard of hearing,
and they have shut their eyes,
so that they would not see with their eyes
and hear with their ears
and understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’
The so-called ‘Parable of the Sower’ is recorded in all three Synoptic Gospels. And, in each case, the parable itself is followed by an explanation by Jesus of why he taught in parables.
Luke’s is the briefest account, followed by Mark’s and then Matthew’s:
In each case, the teaching is prompted by a question from Jesus’ disciples. From Mk 4:10, it is apparent that a group wider than just the Twelve is meant.
In Luke, the disciples ask about the meaning of this parable (the ‘Parable of the Sower’).
In Mark, they ask him about ‘the parables’.
In Matthew, they ask, ‘Why do you speak to them in parables?’
A change of direction
The so-called ‘Parable of the Sower’ signals a change of direction in Jesus’ public ministry. He begins for the first time to teach in parables. But why did he do so? People were starting to group themselves into admirers and enemies. Some were wildly enthusiastic; others accused him of being in league with the devil But even many of the fans might have been enthusiastic for the wrong reasons. They were sensation-seeker, only interested in what fantastic miracle he would perform next. But Jesus was looking for admirers, he had no interest in establishing a fan base for himself. He was looking for disciples. What he wanted was anybody who would show some commitment, understanding, faith. And it was to bring all these attitudes to the surface that he started teaching in parables.
Garland remarks that ‘the parable of the sower and the parable of the tenants of the vineyard are the two major parables in Mark. Both come after challenges from religious authorities from Jerusalem (Mk 3:20–35; 11:27–33). Both are allegories that provide vital clues for interpreting what is happening in Jesus’ ministry. The parable of the tenants of the vineyard allegorizes the rejection of Jesus, the son who has come to collect the fruit of the harvest, and portends his death. The parable of the sower evaluates the various responses to his sowing of the word and portends the misunderstanding that accompanies his word and deeds as well as the harvest that will occur among those who do understand and respond.’
So, what’s a parable?
It’s a bit like a Peanuts cartoon. A Peanuts cartoon gives you a fresh angle on the meaning of life. Lucy says, “Life is like a deckchair. Some people place it so they can see where they’re going, and some people place it so they can see where they’ve come from.” Charlie Brown complains, “I can’t even get mine unfolded.” A parable gives you a fresh angle on the kingdom of God. A parable has often been called, ‘an earthly story with a heavenly meaning.’ Because you have to work out the meaning for yourself, it acts as a kind of test – not of intelligence, but of insight and responsiveness to Jesus and his message.
Kennther Bailey wrote:
‘A parable is an extended metaphor, and as such, it is not a delivery system for an idea but a house in which the reader/listener is invited to take up residence…then that person is urged by the parable to look on the world through the windows of that residence…’ (Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes)
Not a new genre
Edwards summarises:
‘Jesus did not invent the parable genre, for there are occasional examples of such in the OT (2 Sam 12:1–14; Ezek 17:1–10) and among Jewish rabbis from the second century onward. There were, of course, also many stories and fables in Greco-Roman antiquity, some of which resemble parables. But in quantity and excellence Jesus’ parables are without parallel in the ancient world. The Gospels record some sixty different parables of Jesus, most of which are found in Matthew and Luke, fewer in Mark, and none in John.’
An oral, rather than a written, medium
William Barclay makes the following important point:
‘The parable, as Jesus used it, was spoken; it was not read. Its impact had to be immediate, not the result of long study with commentaries and dictionaries. It made truth flash upon a man as the lightning suddenly illuminates a pitch-dark night. In our study of the parables that means two things for us.
‘First, it means that we must amass every possible detail about the background of life in Palestine, so that the parable will strike us as it did those who heard it for the first time. We must think and study and imagine ourselves back into the minds of those who were listening to Jesus.
‘Second, it means that generally speaking a parable will have only one point. A parable is not an allegory; an allegory is a story in which every possible detail has an inner meaning; but an allegory has to be read and studied; a parable is heard. We must be very careful not to make allegories of the parables and to remember that they were designed to make one stabbing truth flash out at a man the moment he heard it.’ (DSB)
Common theme
On the nature and purpose of Jesus’ parables, Edwards remarks that the most common subject is the kingdom of God, which is illustrated from everyday objects and events – fishing, farming, housekeeping, and so on. Although they demand no special knowledge, they are not straightforward to understand. They cannot be comprehending by simply inspection from the ‘outside’. They can only be understood from the ‘inside’, by hearers placing themselves in the world of the parable and finding where they fit into the story.
Parables do not simply speak; they act. They do not function primarily to inform, but to prompt a response.
Later
According to Mk 4:10, this segment of teaching took place at a later time, because in v1 and and v36 Jesus is in the boat, preaching to the crowds. Now he is ‘alone’ with his disciples and others. As Edwards remarks, such private settings often provide opportunities for revelation in Mark.
Interpretative questions
This teaching raises various exegetical and theological questions. Focussing on Mk 4:11f, Douglas McComiskey asks:
‘What is the “secret” of the kingdom of God? How is it “given” to the disciples? What are the lines along which Jesus divides disciples from “those outside”? What is the function of the Isa 6:9–10 quotation in his argument? and, perhaps the most important and difficult question: Does he desire that certain people not be saved?’
This parable a key to them all
Difficult this teaching may be, but, along with the ‘Parable of the Sower’ which it accompanies, was regarded by Jesus himself as some of his most important. The disciples, although initiated into the mystery of God’s Kingdom, were still slow to understand. If they cannot understand this parable, all the others will remain obscure to them also. The Parable of the Sower is a key to all parables, because it describes the different degrees of receptiveness of the human heart to the word of God, which different degrees it is the general design of the parables to expose.
In Mark’s version, “everything is in parables”. This, according to Garland, suggests that Jesus’ ministry generally, including his miracles, may be regarded as parabolic, requiring interpretation (see Mk 3:22–30; 6:51–52; 8:14–21).
Cole comments:
‘In a sense, this parable is the key to all the other parables, because in all of them Jesus preaches or ‘sows’ the word.’
The quotation from Isaiah
As Mounce remarks, ‘this is the only fulfillment quotation that is ascribed to Jesus himself.’
The quotation is from Isa 6:9. Scarcely any passage in the Old Testament is so frequently quoted in the New Testament as this. Not on is it quoted in all three Synoptic versions of the ‘Parable of the Sower’, it is also found in Jn 12:40; Acts 28:26 and Rom 11:8.
R.E. Watts (CNTUOT) notes that:
‘striking parallels exist between the setting of Isa. 6 and Mark’s presentation (see R. E. Watts 2000: 184–210; also Gnilka 1961: 205; Schneck 1994: 125–27). In Isa. 6 the fundamental datum is Yahweh’s kingship; in Mark’s Gospel Jesus inaugurates the kingdom of God (mentioned three times in the parables material [4:11, 26, 30]), and the Beelzebul debate concerns the clash of kingdoms (3:24). In both cases God’s proffered salvation is met with rebellion cloaked in piety, especially on the part of the nation’s wise leaders’
Watts continues:
‘Striking parallels exist between the setting of Isa. 6 and Mark’s presentation. In Isa. 6 the fundamental datum is Yahweh’s kingship; in Mark’s Gospel Jesus inaugurates the kingdom of God (mentioned three times in the parables material [Mk 4:11, 26, 30]), and the Beelzebul debate concerns the clash of kingdoms (Mk 3:24). In both cases God’s proffered salvation is met with rebellion cloaked in piety, especially on the part of the nation’s wise leaders.’
But, adds Watts, there are also differences between the setting in Isaiah and that in Mark’s Gospel. In Isaiah, the die has been cast – people and leaders alike have made their decision. But in Mark this is not the case. Just as the Parable of the Soils teaches, responses vary. Jesus’ family members have their doubts, and are, for the time being, outside (Mk 3:31f), but they do not denounce Jesus publicly. The crowd (Mk 4:1) seems undecided, and so are urged to listen carefully. And many have responded in faith.
As in Isaiah (Isa 7:9), the focus is on repentance and faith (Mk 1:14f), and the healing and salvation this leads to (Mk 2:5; 5:34–36; 9:24; 10:52). But for those who refuse, who remain on the outside, Jesus’ parables merely confirm them in their choice.
Snodgrass urges that the Isaiah message is not merely one of condemnation, still less of predestination. It is, rather, a provocation to hear and respond:
‘The function of this language is both a warning of what is happening — that judgment is inevitable, that the people have not responded and will not — and also a challenge and an invitation for people not to remain in such insensitivity but to hear the word and repent. ‘
Further:
- ‘the harsh language of Isa 6:9-10 is a prophetic instrument for warning and challenge;
- it expresses the certainty of God’s coming judgment for a people who are past hearing;
- the words of Isa 6:9 became the classic expression to speak of the people’s hardness of heart; and
- the proclamation still expects and seeks some to hear and follow.’
And again:
‘Jesus taught in parables, like any good prophet, to appeal and to enable hearing. Where parables find a willing response, further explanation is given. Where there is no response the message is lost.’
“The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you”
I have quoted mark’s version: some variation of this occurs in all three versions. Edwards describes ‘has been given’ as a divine passive. It is not known or perceived by merely human means, but, rather, by revelation. We are mindful, that although the disciples were in this privileged position, they would frequently demonstrate confusion and obtuseness.
It is a gift:
‘Disciples are not quicker than others, nor are they able to unravel mysteries for themselves. The mystery is something that is “given” to them. The understanding comes by grace as Jesus’ interpretation unlocks the mystery for them.’ (Garland)
“Mysteries”
In Lk 8:10 Jesus speaks of “the secrets of the kingdom of God” – or, ‘the mysteries.’
This is, at first sight, puzzling. For one thing, we tend to think that Jesus spoke in parables in order to clarify, not obscure, the message. For another thing, expressing things as ‘secrets’ or ‘mysteries’ sounds like a tactic we associate with Gnosticism, not with Jesus.
In fact, Jesus’ intention is very different to the secretive methods of the Gnostics and adherents of the mystery religions. Such mysteries are
‘inside information on life which only believers, only disciples, are given to understand. They are…truths which the natural man cannot discover by himself. They are great missing pieces, if you like, of the jigsaw puzzle of life.’ (Stedman)
This is
‘not a mystery in the sense that it is incomprehensible, but it is a “secret” in that not everyone yet knows it’ (France).
In other words:
‘In the NT it does not mean something mysterious or enigmatic. Nor is it something only for the initiated few. The emphasis is on God’s disclosure to human beings of what was previously unknown.’ (EBC rev.)
Garland says that although the nature of this secret is not made explicit, the context suggests that it has to do with ‘the kingdom of God coming in a veiled way in the person, words, and works of Jesus.’
Schnabel traces the expression back to the book of Daniel:
‘The Greek term mystērion is most plausibly understood in the context of its use in Daniel. The Aramaic term rāz, translated in the LXX as mystērion, refers to the interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream which is a ‘secret’ in that it is hidden from Babylon’s wise men but revealed by God to Daniel, who explains, ‘not because I have greater wisdom than anyone else alive, but so that Your Majesty may know the interpretation’ (Dan. 2:30; cf. 2:18–19, 27–30, 47; cf. Amos 3:7).’
Inside and outside
Luke’s version speaks of ‘others’, Mark’s, of ‘those outside’.
A parable is like a door: it lets some people in, while it keeps others out. Some remain outside, staring at the door. Others open it and go through.
In other words, Jesus’ parabolic teaching has a discriminatory effect. To those who accept it, more will be (and is, at this very moment being) given. To those who reject, even what they have will be taken away.
But, as Stein remarks, the message was not to be kept secret: it was to become an ‘open secret’:
‘The disciples chose not only to hear but also to know these “secrets” concerning God’s kingdom. This, however, was not simply for their own benefit but in order that they might be able to make this known to others (Luke 1:3; 24:45–49; Acts 1:8; cf. the condemnation of the Pharisees in Luke 11:52 for not doing this).’
‘Mary Ann Tolbert correctly states, “Judging by the varied opinions and continued controversies that mark the study of the parables of Jesus…it is undoubtedly true that most modern parable interpreters fall into the category of the ‘others'”‘ (Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral)
Without spiritual insight the parables are unintelligible. They are therefore a condemnation to the wilfully blind and hostile, while they are a blessing to the teachable.
Who, exactly, are those who are ‘outside’? They are the religious leaders and members of Jesus family. But we are not to understand there to be an immutable distinction between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’. As Edwards remarks,
‘some outsiders will become insiders—the Gerasene demoniac (Mk 5:1–20), the woman with a flow of blood (Mk 5:25–34), the Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:24–30), a Gentile centurion (Mk 15:38–39), perhaps even a scribe (Mk 12:28–34). Likewise, some insiders, such as Judas, will become outsiders (Mk 14:1–2, 10–11, 21, 43–46).’
Snodgrass notes that at times Jesus speaks even of the Twelve as having hard hearts, unseeing eyes and deaf ears (Mk 8:17f).
Garland, similarly, says:
‘As the story progresses, the disciples’ dazed incomprehension (Mk 7:17–18; 8:14–21, 27–33; 9:9–13, 30–32; 10:23–31, 32–45; 11:20–25) and blindness (Mk 4:35–41; 6:45–52; 9:2–8; 14:17–25, 32–43) reveals that even they are at risk of becoming outsiders. They particularly fail to grasp fully the secret of the cross and resurrection. At the end, one becomes a traitor and betrays him; another denies him. All flee, leaving him to die alone. On the other hand, apparent outsiders often show the faith of insiders: the woman with the flow of blood (Mk 5:34), the Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:29), the father of an epileptic (Mk 9:24), the exorcists who do not follow the disciples (Mk 9:38–41), the mothers of children (Mk 10:13–16), blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46–52), the woman who anointed Jesus (Mk 14:3–9), and the Roman centurion (Mk 15:39).’
So, why did Jesus teach in parables?
Bowker (cited by Snodgrass) thinks that ‘in parables’ (Mk 4:11) does not mean ‘enigmatically’, but ‘in clearest possible illustration’. But Snodgrass himself thinks that this is inadequate: parables do have a ‘veiling’ quality. They both reveal and conceal. The receptive become fruitful; the resistant become ever more obdurate.
Carson (ENB) replies:
‘It is naive to say Jesus spoke [parables] so that everyone might more easily grasp the truth, and it is simplistic to say that the sole function of parables to outsiders was to condemn them. If Jesus simply wished to hide the truth from the outsiders, he need never have spoken to them. His concern for mission (Mt 9:35–38; 10:1–10; 28:16–20) excludes that idea. So he must preach without casting his pearls before pigs (Mt 7:6). He does so in parables—i.e., in such a way as to harden and reject those who are hard of heart and to enlighten his disciples. His disciples, it must be remembered, are not just the Twelve but those who were following him (see comment on Mt 5:1–12) and who, it is hoped, go on to do the will of the Father (Mt 12:50) and do not end up blaspheming the Spirit (Mt 12:30–32). Thus the parables spoken to the crowds do not simply convey information, nor mask it, but present the claims of the inaugurated kingdom and so challenge the hearers.’
Schnabel emphasises that the state of spiritual blindness is not necessarily permanent:
‘At the same time, the parable of the lamp and its explanation by Jesus in verses 21–22, emphasizing that what is now hidden must be brought to light, suggests that the verdict of verses 11–12 may be only temporary, leaving hope that the outsiders ‘need not be permanently written off, that the division between insiders and outsiders is not a gulf without bridges’ (France, p. 201).’
As Hooker remarks, the boundary between those who are ‘inside’ and those who are ‘outside’ is not always obvious:
‘The saying appears to stand in marked contrast to Mark’s story; for from this point onwards, the Twelve behave with a singular lack of understanding, while some outsiders show remarkable faith. The disciples fail to understand the parables (4:13) and the power of Jesus (4:40f.; 6:37, 49–52; 8:4, 14–21); they are mystified by his teaching (7:18)—especially on the need for suffering (8:32–4; 9:32–4; 10:32, 35–41)—and they fail him at the crucial hour (14:32–42, 47, 50, 66–72). But to those outside, faith is given: to the woman with a haemorrhage (5:34), the Syro-Phoenician woman (7:29), the father of the epileptic boy (9:24), the children who are brought for blessing (10:13–16), the woman who anoints Jesus (14:3–9) and—most remarkable of all—the centurion at the Cross (15:39).’
‘So that…they may not see, and…may not understand’
The key interpretative question is whether we are to understand this saying as predictive or prescriptive.
In this quotation from Isa 6:10,
‘parables are presented not as windows through which outsiders perceive the kingdom of God but as doors debarring them from it’ (Edwards)
The teaching of teaching Jesus parallels that of Isaiah, who was sent to preach despite being warned in advance that people would not listen.
Matthew interpolates as follows:- ‘In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah…’
The paraphrase of Isa 6:10 (“lest they repent and it be forgiven them”) follows the Targum (“and it be forgiven them”) rather than the Hebrew (“and I will heal them”).
Luke’s hina (“in order that”) is hoti (“because”) in Matthew.
A key question is whether Jesus spoke in parables with the result that some of his hearers would not understand and believe, or with the intention that they would not do so. The latter implies a determinism somewhat akin to the (disputed) doctrine of ‘double predestination’. Thus the issue becomes, for many thoughtful readers, one of divine sovereignty versus human responsibility.
According to Harper’s Bible Commentary,
‘this is one of the most controverted in NT scholarship. It implies a harsh determinism where Jesus spoke in parables in order to prevent his hearers from perceiving or understanding “lest they convert and be forgiven.”’
According to Wessel and Strauss (EBC):
‘Taken at face value, the statement seems to be saying that the purpose of parables is that unbelievers (“those on the outside,” v. 11) may not receive the truth and be converted. That this statement was thought to be difficult theologically may be seen in Matthew’s changing hina (“in order that”) to hoti (“with the result that”; the NIV translates hina with the ambiguous “so that”) and in Luke’s dropping the mēpote (“otherwise”) clause.’
Witherington says:
‘If Lane is right that the formulaic introduction to the quote with ινα means “so that” rather than “in order that,” the point would be that Jesus’ parables have the effect, rather than the purpose, of concealing the truth from those not ready to perceive, and perhaps revealing the truth only to those who are (which depends on what type of soil they are).’
But Witherington himself thinks that a purposive sense is inescapable.
Others, however, think that the sense is predictive, rather than purposive. So Cole.
Wessel and Strauss consider a range of ways in which interpreters have attempted to soften the force of the text. They conclude, however, that:
‘the most natural interpretation remains that of purpose.’
Edwards discusses the tension between divine sovereignty and human responsibility:
‘The tension was already present in Isaiah 6, where God sent his prophet to a people who would not respond. It was evident in Pharaoh’s hardness, which is attributed alternatively to his own choice (Exod 7:14, 22; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:7, 35; 13:15) and to God’s will (Exod 4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10). It is evident in the parable of the sower where a farmer sows seed on ground that cannot produce a yield. The tension is preserved in Mark’s reflection on the defection of Judas, one of Jesus’ chosen, who betrayed him: “ ‘On the one hand, the Son of Man must be betrayed as it is written, but woe to that man through whom he is betrayed’ ” (14:21). The disbelief and rejection experienced by Jesus were later experienced by the early church as well, and again Isa 6:9–10 (along with Jer 5:21) spoke to the problem of the hardened heart (Acts 28:26–27; John 12:40).’
Edwards explains:
‘The parable of the sower is like the cloud that separated the fleeing Israelites from the pursuing Egyptians, bringing “darkness to the one side and light to the other” (Exod 14:20). That which was blindness to Egypt was revelation to Israel. The same event was either a vehicle of light or of darkness, depending on one’s stance with God.’
Hurtado thinks that these words of Jesus are not so harsh as they appear to be:
‘Isaiah 6:9–10 is an indication of divine sovereignty and foreknowledge intended to say that the apparent failure of the messenger is no argument against his divine call. In its form, it is an ironic statement, giving the foreseen net result of the prophet’s ministry as if it were all intended, when this is of course not the case. That Mark 4:12 is an allusion to Isaiah 6:9–10 suggests that this too is prophetic irony.’
It is not that the parables cause unbelief, but that they reveal it. Had Jesus tried to persuade people to belief by miracle, by moral code, or by doctrinal formula, it would have been false belief.
Hurtado continues:
‘Jesus’ parables are not simply teaching aids, like charts, diagrams, or other such devices. Though they present the kingdom of God in story form and analogy, the kingdom of God they describe does not conform to general expectation but makes its appearance in “secret” form in the ministry of Jesus and his disciples. Thus, the parables are difficult, challenging, because they embody and testify to a reality not easily recognized and received for what it really is.’
For Stein, the meaning in Luke is clear enough:
‘That Luke understood the hina as indicating the result of Jesus’ preaching receives additional support from Acts 28:26–28, where Luke quoted Isa 6:9 once again. Here the responsibility for what happens lies clearly upon those who willingly reject the gospel message.’
According to Mk 4:24f those who have (received the message) will receive more, whereas those who have not (received it) will lose even what they had.
Hooker sounds a note of interpretative caution:
‘Jewish thought tended to blur the distinction between purpose and result; if God was sovereign, then of course what happened must be his will, however strange this appeared.’
In the words, “Otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!” Garland sees deep irony here: “…because the last thing they want to do turn and be forgiven!”
Carson (EBC) urges against simplistic interpretations:
‘It is naive to say Jesus spoke [parables] so that everyone might more easily grasp the truth, and it is simplistic to say that the sole function of parables to outsiders was to condemn them. If Jesus simply wished to hide the truth from the outsiders, he need never have spoken to them. His concern for mission (Mt 9:35–38; 10:1–10; 28:16–20) excludes that idea. So he must preach without casting his pearls before pigs (Mt 7:6). He does so in parables—i.e., in such a way as to harden and reject those who are hard of heart and to enlighten his disciples. His disciples, it must be remembered, are not just the Twelve but those who were following him (see comment on Mt 5:1–12) and who, it is hoped, go on to do the will of the Father (Mt 12:50) and do not end up blaspheming the Spirit (Mt 12:30–32). Thus the parables spoken to the crowds do not simply convey information, nor mask it, but present the claims of the inaugurated kingdom and so challenge the hearers.’
Mt 11:25f ‘At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and revealed them to little children. 11:26 Yes, Father, for this was your gracious will.’ (Lk 10:21f)
Theology
Watts summarises the theological implications:
‘Soteriologically,…the parables are neither esoteric nor rigidly predestinarian, but rather are revelatory of the kingdom and of the hearers’ hearts. They are the judicial response from the one who inaugurates God’s kingly reign to stubbornness of heart and blasphemous rebellion. As such, they are also a warning to those who, perhaps like Jesus’ family, are less hostile but nevertheless still on the outside.
‘Ecclesiologically, those who are confident in their own wisdom reject the word and work of the Holy One of God (1:24; cf. Isaiah’s characteristic “Holy One of Israel”) and despise the instruction of Yahweh-Warrior (cf. “Lord of Hosts” [Isa. 5:24b]). In contrast to those who “do the will of God” (3:35), they will find that “their root will become rotten and their blossom like dust” (Isa. 5:24a [cf. Mark 4:3–6]).
‘Christologically, Mark is increasingly clear that something special has happened in Jesus. Yahweh has at last responded to long-exiled Israel’s lament and come down in him. Tragically, however, as was so often the case in the nation’s history, many have hardened their hearts. To reject Jesus is to reject Yahweh himself, to cut oneself off from the faithful in Israel, to choose death, and so to face judgment (11:13–14, 20–23; 12:9; 13). But for those who will listen carefully, this need not be the result. Taken together, the Beelzebul controversy and the material on the parables indicate that the eschatological division of Israel has begun, and it all turns on one’s response to Jesus (3:24–25; 4:11; cf. Isa. 65:1–13).
(Slightly reformatted and with emphasis added)
Implications for today’s preachers and hearers
Bock (NIVAC) notes that the character of the soil/heart is evinced over time:
‘When we approach this text, we tend to present it as a one-moment response: “As you hear this message today, which soil are you?” But the question is more comprehensive: “As you look at your spiritual walk up to today, which soil are you?” The parable looks at a career of response, as is clear when one considers that the good soil brings up various levels of fruit. The assessment is built on moments, to be sure, but it requires a life of response to consider what one’s soul looks like relative to a slowly developing crop. A plant does not sprout forth overnight, nor does the harvest of the heart.’
Garland notes that Jesus’ parabolic teaching is very different from the orderly propositional teaching that many value and engage in today. Who among us would dare to preach an obscure message, and then wait for earnest enquirers to come to us afterwards and ask for an explanation? But Jesus did not see his teaching ministry as merely about information transfer. He wanted to wake people up. He wanted them to see things afresh. He wanted them to come to a new realisation. But such teaching will always separate out those who, on the one hand, are impervious to the things of God, too easily distracted by the attractions of the present world, and, on the other hand, those who sincerely desire to seek God. Are we trying to impress people, or bolster attendance figures? Or are we prepared to teach the things of the Kingdom the way that Jesus taught them, even if we meet with widespread rejection?
Fee & Stuart agree that by teaching in this way Jesus putting down a marker that would end up separating those who were open to his person and message and those who were not.
‘If the parables…are not allegorical mysteries for the church, what did Jesus mean when responding to the disciples’ inquiry about the parables (Mark 4:10–12) with language about the “mystery” of the kingdom of God? Most likely the clue to this saying lies in a play on words in Jesus’ native Aramaic. The Aramaic term mĕthal, which was translated parabolē in Greek, was used for a whole range of figures of speech in the riddle/puzzle/parable category, not just for the story variety called “parables” in English. Probably the phrase “to those on the outside everything is said in parables” (v. 11) meant that the meaning of Jesus’ ministry (the secret of the kingdom) could not be perceived by those on the outside; it was like a mĕthal, a riddle, to them. Hence his speaking in mathlîn (parables) was part of the mĕthal (riddle) of his whole ministry to them. They saw, but they failed to see; they heard—and even understood—the parables, but they failed to hear in a way that led to obedience. They were looking for their idea of power and glory, not for a humble Galilean who cared for all the wrong kinds of people.’ (How To Read The Bible For All Its Worth, p156)
Wright (Jesus and the Victory of God) summarises the meaning of this difficult text:
‘If too many understand too well, the prophet’s liberty of movement, and perhaps life, may be cut short. Jesus knew his kingdom-announcement was subversive. It would be drastically unwelcome, for different reasons, to the Romans, to Herod, and also to zealous Jews and their leaders, whether official or not. He must therefore speak in parables, ‘so that they may look and look but never see’. It was the only safe course. Only those in the know must be allowed to glimpse what Jesus believed was going on. These stories would get past the censor—for the moment. There would come a time for more open revelation.’
Jesus’ teaching reveals spiritual blindness in unexpected places:
‘God’s mysterious revelation…reveals the blindness of the world, and that blindness is manifest in surprising groups: the religious authorities, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law (Mk 2:1–3:6; 3:22–30), Jesus’ nearest relatives (Mk 3:31–35), and even his disciples (Mk 8:14–21).’ (Garland)
13:16 “But your eyes are blessed because they see, and your ears because they hear. 13:17 For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.
‘They wished to see the times of the Messiah. They looked to it as a time when the hopes of the world would be fulfilled, and the just be happy. See Jn 8:5,6 “Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad.” See also 1 Pet 1:10-12; Heb 11:13. So Isaiah and the prophets looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as the consummation of their wishes, and the end of the prophecies, Rev 19:10. The object always dearest to the hearts of all righteous men is, to witness the coming and advancement of the kingdom of Christ.’ (Barnes)
13:18 “So listen to the parable of the sower: 13:19 When anyone hears the word about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches what was sown in his heart; this is the seed sown along the path. 13:20 The seed sown on rocky ground is the person who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy. 13:21 But he has no root in himself and does not endure; when trouble or persecution comes because of the word, immediately he falls away. 13:22 The seed sown among thorns is the person who hears the word, but worldly cares and the seductiveness of wealth choke the word, so it produces nothing. 13:23 But as for the seed sown on good soil, this is the person who hears the word and understands. He bears fruit, yielding a hundred, sixty, or thirty times what was sown.”
The Parable of the Weeds, 24-30
13:24 He presented them with another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a person who sowed good seed in his field. 13:25 But while everyone was sleeping, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. 13:26 When the plants sprouted and bore grain, then the weeds also appeared. 13:27 So the slaves of the owner came and said to him, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Then where did the weeds come from?’ 13:28 He said, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the slaves replied, ‘Do you want us to go and gather them?’ 13:29 But he said, ‘No, since in gathering the weeds you may uproot the wheat with them. 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At harvest time I will tell the reapers, “First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned, but then gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”
Bruner points out that this ‘this parable takes over where the first parable left off: on the good soil. This enemy also “sows” seed. This means that Satan, too, works through the power of the word; he, too, uses a message and words (cf. the Temptations).’
Taylor and others remark that this parable should be read alongside that of the net (Mt 13:47-50). They both deal with the co-existence of good and evil in the present world, and both teach the final separation of the two. The first teaches the impossibility of such a separation before the appointed time, whereas the second affirms that it will certainly take place.
Carson:
‘The parable of the soils shows that the kingdom will produce an abundant crop in spite of hard hearts, competing pressures, and even failure. But one might ask whether Messiah’s people should immediately separate the crop from the weeds. This next parable answers that question negatively: there will be a delay in separation until the harvest. This parable also explains how it is possible for the kingdom to be present in the world while not wiping out all opposition.’
France remarks that, although this parable is generally understood to be referring to a mixture of good and evil in the church, this would not yet be an issue. The primary reference, therefore, must be to such a mixture in the world.
‘So the canvas is broader than the specific issue of church discipline. Jesus announced God’s kingdom, and this would lead many of his hearers to expect a cataclysmic disruption of society, an immediate and absolute division between the ‘sons of light’ and the ‘sons of darkness’, as the men of Qumran put it. Yet things went on apparently as before. It was to this impatience that the parable was primarily directed. God’s kingdom does bring division, and that division is final, but while it is already present in principle, its full outworking is for God to bring about in the final judgment, not for man to anticipate by human segregation.’ (France)
France observes that, just as the following two parable refer to the hiddenness of God’s kingdom, so does the present one.
Why does there continue to be evil in the world? Why doesn’t God just sweep it all away? When, and how, will it all end?
Why does there continue to be evil in the church? Why are there so many hypocrites, so many contradictions? Why do large sections of the so-called church believe so little and deny so much. Why doesn’t God root out all the error and immorality and make the church as morally pure and as spiritually powerful as it ought to be?
To what extent should those who regard themselves as true followers of Jesus Christ take steps to distance themselves from those with whom they differ?
Jesus told this parable to encourage and inform his followers that continued existence of the false along with the true, the evil along with the good, is part of God’s plan. There is indeed to be a final separation – but in God’s time, not ours.
He presented them – the people, not just the disciples – with another parable.
‘The kingdom of heaven is like a man’ – as in other cases where this formula is used, the comparison is not so much with the noun that follows but with the whole parable. Thus we might render it: ‘The kingdom of heaven is like this: a man…’
“Weeds” – probably darnel, a poisonous plant virtually indistinguishable from wheat until the ears appear. It was an offence in Roman law to sow darnel among wheat as revenge, which suggests that this kind of thing actually occurred. In the last century, a field belonging to Dean Alford (author of ‘Come, ye thankful people, come’) was maliciously oversown with charlock, and he was able to claim heavy damages against the offender. The stronger roots of the darnel would become tangled with those of the wheat, making selective weeding impossible.
Jesus explains that the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom, the true followers of Christ. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, the lost. While God is calling sinners to himself, Satan is labouring to keep men in their sins. The weeds may at first be virtually indistinguishable from the wheat in the field. But as they grow towards maturity, their lack of useful fruit becomes apparent. ‘By their fruit you will recognise them’, Mt 7:16.
‘Most worthy of notice is the plainness with which the doctrine concerning Satan and his agency, his active hostility to the blessedness of man, of which there is so little in the Old Testament, comes out in the New…As the lights become brighter, the shadows become deeper.’ (Trench)
Mounce: ‘Jesus had already encountered strong opposition. In Matthew 12:34 he called the Pharisees snakes. Would it be unreasonable for him now to tell a parable that points out that this same kind of opposition would continue until the day of judgment, at which time a final separation would be made?’
“Where did the weeds comes from?” – ‘This is the problem of evil, perhaps the most frequently raised problem in the church. If God is a God of love, why is there so much—why is there any—evil in the world? And more specifically (and closer to our parable), if God is building a church in the world, why are there so many evil persons in her?’ (Bruner)
“An enemy did this” – ‘The words “An enemy did this” leave much unsaid. We would like to know much more about this enemy: where he came from, why he is an enemy at all, and so much else. But Jesus is content with defending God’s honor and indicting the true agent of evil. Believers should usually not venture much further into the metaphysics of evil than Jesus does here…Jesus’ four words, “An enemy did this,” perform the same defense of God’s honor as Gen 1’s creation climax, “Behold, it was very good” (Gen 1:31), which means “no evil was laid upon the world by God’s hand” (von Rad, Gen., 71).’ (Bruner)
Let both grow together until the harvest – for to separate them prematurely would be to damage the good plants. Good and evil grow alike, often inter-twined, often inseparable. Together in the workplace, in the neighbourhood, in the school and college, in the home, yes and in the visible church. Both good and evil are ripening, maturing, growing. Cf Jas 1:2-4,13-15. Sometimes the question is asked, Will the world get better or worse in the days to come? The answer is – Possibly both, for they do not exclude each other. Where the kingdom of God is most active, there will the wickedness of Satan be stirred up with the greatest ferocity. Mt 24:24 ‘For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect – if that were possible.’ 1 Pet 5:8 ‘Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.’
‘Luther’s broad, inclusive church galled his more radical Protestant contemporaries, but Luther said he learned from Jesus’ parable that “the church cannot be without evil people. Those fanatics who don’t want to tolerate any weeds end up with no wheat either” (WA, 38, 560, 33 [1538]).’ (Bruner)
‘No progressive Christian likes this postponement of justice to a “next life” (“pie in the sky”). But Jesus unapologetically refers disciples to a divine justice at the end of history. If Jesus was not ashamed of a final judgment, why should his disciples be? If there is a last judgment, there is surely no impertinence in referring to it.’ (Bruner)
‘The Old Testament commonly uses the figure of harvest for the last judgment (Jer. 51:33; Hos. 6:11; cf. Rev. 14:14–16).’ (Mounce)
Let us not be too discouraged when we see the cause of God opposed in the world. Indeed, such opposition is strong evidence of the presence of true and vital Christianity. When the church is at ease in the world; when Satan can’t even be bothered to try to counterfeit the real thing – that is when we need to start worrying.
The harvest is not yet. The sons of the kingdom and the sons of the evil one are both are maturing towards their final destiny. But man is not able infallibly to separate them, and God is not willing to do so – yet. So be patient. Be patient, you who would like to escape from the evils of this present world. You can spend our life as hermits, yet still never find the peace you seek. Be patient, you who would like to see a perfect church here on earth. You can spend your lives as spiritual nomads, going from one church to another in order to avoid even the smell of unorthodoxy, or the scent of worldliness, or the odour of moral laxness. Yet you would live out your days in bitter disappointment. We are here taught to expect this very situation, to expect weeds as well as wheat. Be patient, you who see evil apparently triumphing, and the cause of Christ subject to so much persecution, rejection, and ridicule. Remember that God has fixed a time when good and evil will be finally separated and judged. And God’s time is the best time.
‘The Scriptural teaching regarding discipline is not hereby overruled. Quite the contrary. If the spirit of loving patience is exercised, personal discipline (1 Cor. 11:28), mutual discipline (Matt. 18:15, 16; Gal. 6:1, 2), and church discipline (Matt. 18:17, 18; Titus 3:10, 11; Rev. 2:14–16), will all be strengthened and ennobled. Even in the case of church discipline one of the chief purposes is “that the spirit may be saved” (1 Cor. 5:5).’ (Hendriksen)
The Parable of the Mustard Seed, 31-32
13:31 He gave them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. 13:32 It is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest garden plant and becomes a tree, so that the wild birds come and nest in its branches.”
Mt 13:31–33 = Lk 13:18–21
The Parable of the Yeast, 33
13:33 He told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed with three measures of flour until all the dough had risen.”
Three measures of flour – would make enough bread to feed 100 people!
Douglas Adams (The Prostitute in the Family Tree) sees humour in this saying. For a Jew, he writes, the kingdom of heaven would be symbolised by unleavened, not leavened bread. Leaven represented a sinful or immoral life. And woman would not even be allowed into public worship. So (for Adams) Jesus’ teaching about the kingdom completely bypasses ordinary expectations.
But here, as elsewhere in his book, Adams seems to be reading too much into the text. As France (TNTC) comments:
‘Leaven (yeast) is usually in the Bible a symbol for the pervasive power of evil, but it is its pervasiveness, not its metaphorical connections, which is in view here.’
Mounce agrees:
‘During the three Jewish festivals that required all the men to appear before the Lord, yeast was not permitted in any of the sacrifices (Exod. 34:25; 23:18). For the seven days of Passover, all yeast was to be removed from the house: the only bread to be eaten must be unleavened (Exod. 12:15–20). Against this background it is easy to see why leaven came to symbolize that which was unclean or evil (cf. Gal. 5:9; 1 Cor. 5:6–8). In this parable, however, the leaven does not carry that idea. Jesus is not saying that the kingdom is in certain respects evil!’
The Purpose of Parables, 34-35
13:34 Jesus spoke all these things in parables to the crowds; he did not speak to them without a parable. 13:35 This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet:
“I will open my mouth in parables,
I will announce what has been hidden from the foundation of the world.”
‘When you begin with a people who have not heard the gospel, and whose attention you have to win, you can hardly go too far in the use of figure and metaphor. Our Lord Jesus Christ used very much of it; indeed, “without a parable spake he not unto them;” because they were not educated up to the point at which they could profitably hear pure didactic truth. It is noticeable that after the Holy Ghost had been given, fewer parables were used, and the saints were more plainly taught of God. When Paul spoke or wrote to the churches in his epistles he employed few parables, because he addressed those who were advanced in grace and willing to learn…We are to be bound by no hard and fast rules, but should use more or less of any mode of teaching according to our own condition and that of our people.’ (Spurgeon, Lectures to my Students, p354.)
‘Similes were also largely employed by our Lord Himself. He put truth into such a form as would be most likely to arrest the attention of men, and touch their hard hearts, and reach their seared consciences. He taught scarcely anything to the great mass of the people except by this method of instruction. “Without a parable He spake not unto them.” After the close of His open-air addresses to the multitudes, His disciples came to Him, and He opened up to them the inner meaning of His public discourses, and gave them deeper spiritual truth than His ordinary hearers were able or willing to receive. We may conclude, therefore, from our Lord’s use of the parable, that it is a most important mode of teaching, and we cannot do better than employ it ourselves wherever and whenever we can.’ (ibid. p465)
Explanation for the Disciples, 36-43
13:36 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field.” 13:37 He answered, “The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. 13:38 The field is the world and the good seed are the people of the kingdom. The weeds are the people of the evil one, 13:39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. 13:40 As the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 13:41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather from his kingdom everything that causes sin as well as all lawbreakers. 13:42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 13:43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. The one who has ears had better listen!
“The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man” – ‘One of the most significant details in the parables is the way key images that in the OT apply exclusively to God, or occasionally to God’s Messiah, now stand for Jesus himself.’ (Carson)
‘How grand is the view here given by the Great Preacher of His own majesty, as Bengel remarks! The field of the world into which the seed of the kingdom is cast is “His field” (v. 24); the angels who do the work of separation at the end of the world are “His angels;” and as it is “the Son of man that sends them forth,” so in “gathering out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity,” they do but obey His commands (vv. 30, 41.)’ (JFB)
“The field is the world” – Some older expositors (e.g. Taylor) insist that this is not to be understood literally, but rather in connection with the reference to ‘the kingdom of heaven’, interpreted as the church. Most modern commentators, however (e.g. France), do understand this to be a reference to the world at large.
Regarding the mixture of good and evil within the church, Taylor points to the Philippian church, where there were those of whom Paul wrote, with tears, that they were ‘enemies of the cross of Christ’ (Phil 3:17-21). Even within the group of the twelve disciples, there was, of course, Judas.
‘The harvest is the end of the age’ – and not before. The field will be purged. God’s kingdom will be purified. But not until the right time. But why are the weeds left until the harvest? The reason given by Jesus is that to do otherwise ‘might root up the wheat with them.’ And this is born out in experience. For one thing, history is littered with examples of those who have attempted to root out heresy and evil by force. It does far more harm than good. For another thing, the presence of evils such as persecution and opposition serves to refine and galvanise the true church. But another vital reason for the delay in the harvest is that God is patient and longsuffering. Every day of delay is a day of opportunity for the ungodly to turn from their wicked ways and believe in the Lord Jesus.
But don’t turn God’s patience into an excuse for doing nothing. Every day that you refuse him is a day more to repent of, and a day less to repent in. History is moving towards its climax. Still less should you use God’s patience as a reason for ridiculing his apparent inactivity. 2 Pet 3 ‘You must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has from the beginning of creation.” But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgement and destruction of ungodly men. But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare. Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming…But i keeping with his promise we look forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.’
‘The harvesters are angels’ – cf Mt 24:31, God ‘will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other;’ cf Rev 14:17-20. They will work with unerring judgement, distinguishing between the wheat and the weeds, the wicked and the righteous. No pretence, no disguise, no excuse will prevail in that day.
‘We too much forget the angels. Let us not overlook their tender sympathy with us; they behold the Lord rejoicing over our repentance, and they rejoice with him; they are our watchers and the Lord’s messengers of mercy; they bear us up in their hands lest we dash our foot against a stone; and when we come to die, they carry us to the bosom of our Lord. It is one of our joys that we have come to an innumerable company of angels; let us think of them with affection.’ (Spurgeon)
They will weed out of his kingdom… – Cf. Dan 12:2, ‘Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.’
‘They will throw them into the fiery furnace’ – that this punishment is eternal is indicated by Mt 25:46, where the same word (‘everlasting’) is used of the duration both of the fate of the wicked and the life of the righteous. As the fiery furnace signifies the fierce torment, so the weeping indicates the anguish and the gnashing of teeth the despair of this punishment.
‘The righteous will shine like the sun’ – ‘These righteous people…once the light of the world (Mt 5:13–16), now radiate perfection and experience bliss in the consummation of their hopes.’ (Carson)
Those who have received grace here will receive glory there, cf. Dan 12:3, ‘those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.’ If there is an ever-increasing measure of glory now, what a glorious consummation will there be in the world to come?
‘He who has ears, let him hear’ – let him not only be attentive to this parable, but let him consider whether he is wheat, or weed. Let the ungodly tremble as they see in the parable the prospect of everlasting doom. Let them know how they are exercising God’s patience as they sow misery for themselves. And yet let them remember with Augustine: ‘Those who are tares today, may be wheat tomorrow.’ Let the Christian also ask, Have I learned the patience which the Saviour teaches here? The believer can take comfort from this parable, knowing that the angels will not proclaim terror for him, but summon him to what he has longed for. The righteous are little noticed in this world: but in the world to come they will ‘shine like the sun’. Col 3:4, ‘When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.’
‘The parable of the weeds (Matt. 13:24–30 and 36–43) is especially important for explaining why God does not root out all evil from our world immediately. Jesus pictures the wisdom of a farmer who will not damage his crop by pulling up weeds growing near the roots of good plants. So also God wisely delays judgment that would remove all of Satan’s instruments, so that the followers of Christ and the purposes of God may reach maturity. Were God in this moment to root out all evil from the world, then not only would all institutions that are designed for human commerce, security, and health collapse, but so also would the cause of God’s mission in the world for the millions who have yet to claim our Redeemer as their own. Patience in judgment is a significant grace of God.’ (Gospel Transformation Bible)
Drawing on Barclay (DSB) and others, we may summarise the lessons of this parable:
- We must be on our guard, because there is a hostile power in the world that seeks to contaminate and destroy all that is of God.
- We must not expect perfection, either in the world or in the church. If we do, we shall experience perpetual disappointment.
- It is hard to distinguish those who belong to God’s kingdom and those who do not. Evil people may appear to be good, and good people may appear to be bad. We are never in possession of all of the facts. We cannot read the secrets of people’s hearts. And, as Augustine noted, ‘Those who are tares to-day, may be wheat to-morrow’ (quoted by Ryle).
- We must not be quick to judge. Judgement will come in the end, and will be based on the whole life lived. No one act or stage of life will necessarily determine whether a person is saved or lost. ‘Christians who separate others from themselves or themselves from others too promptly or too severely are confronted by this inclusive parable.’ (Bruner)
- Judgement will surely come in the end. We are not to regard this hope as mere ‘pie in the sky’. We may delude ourselves that we can escape the consequences of our thoughts, words, and actions, but we cannot. We may feel that virtue goes unrewarded, and evil unpunished, but justice will win out in the last day.
- Only God has the right and ability to judge. He alone can truly discern the good and the evil.
Parables on the Kingdom of Heaven, 44-52
13:44 “The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure, hidden in a field, that a person found and hid. Then because of joy he went and sold all that he had and bought that field.
The parables of the treasure and pearl indicate the incomparable value of the kingdom, which will cause a man to do everything possible to possess it.
13:45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant searching for fine pearls. 13:46 When he found a pearl of great value, he went out and sold everything he had and bought it.
13:47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was cast into the sea that caught all kinds of fish. 13:48 When it was full, they pulled it ashore, sat down, and put the good fish into containers and threw the bad away. 13:49 It will be this way at the end of the age. Angels will come and separate the evil from the righteous 13:50 and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
This is the seventh and last parable in this section, and draws on a familiar scene along the shoreline of the Sea of Galilee.
The kingdom of heaven is like a net – As usual, we should understand the meaning to be: “The kingdom of heaven is like this:….” In other words, the comparison is with the whole content of the parable, and not just the net. It is reading too much into the detail to say with Gill, ‘this the Gospel and the ministry of it may be compared to a net, for its meanness in the esteem of men; being despicable, and of no account in the eyes of the world: and yet like a net, a piece of curious artifice and workmanship, being the produce of the grace of God; in which his manifold wisdom is displayed, and is what angels desire to look into: it is designed, and purposely contrived, for the gathering in of sinners to Christ, and to his churches, though by accident, it has other uses; such as troubling of the world, as the net does the waters of the sea, and drawing out the corruptions of the men of it, as that does weeds, stones, &c. and which, like a net, can do nothing of itself, unless cast; and not then neither, unless succeeded with a divine blessing.’
The net in question was a drag-net. This was a large net with floats at the top and weights at the bottom. One end would be fastened at the shore, and the boat would drag the net in a semi-circle, trapping fish between the net and the shore. Once this had been achieved, the fishermen would sit on the shore, and sort the fish. Obviously, the good fish were kept and the bad ones were rejected.
‘Of at least twenty-four species of fish counted in the Lake of Galilee, many were unclean or inedible, and the net would not discriminate in its catch. Until the final day, Jesus will continue eating with sinners to seek and save the lost. (Mt 13:28-29,48-50) The kingdom had not consumed the wicked with fire (3:10-12) or come “with signs to be observed;” (compare Lk 17:20) it had invaded the world in a hidden way and would remain hidden until the end. But while the parable probably applies primarily to the world, those who apply the parable to the church are not wholly amiss: the same line between righteous and wicked will ultimately divide Jesus’ professing disciples (13:20-23).’ (IVP Commentary)
‘(1.) The world is a vast sea, and the children of men are things creeping innumerable, both small and great, in that sea, Ps 104:25. Men in their natural state are like the fishes of the sea that have no ruler over them, Hab 1:14.
(2.) The preaching of the gospel is the casting of a net into this sea, to catch something out of it, for his glory who has the sovereignty of the sea. Ministers are fishers of men, employed in casting and drawing this net; and then they speed, when at Christ’s word they let down the net; otherwise, they toil and catch nothing.
(3.) This net gathers of every kind, as large dragnets do. In the visible church there is a deal of trash and rubbish, dirt and weeds and vermin, as well as fish.
(4.) There is a time coming when this net will be full, and drawn to the shore; a set time when the gospel shall have fulfilled that for which it was sent, and we are sure it shall not return void, Isa 55:10,11. The net is now filling; sometimes it fills faster than at other times, but still it fills, and will be drawn to shore, when the mystery of God shall be finished.
(5.) When the net is full and drawn to the shore, there shall be a separation between the good and bad that were gathered in it. Hypocrites and true Christians shall then be parted; the good shall be gathered into vessels, as valuable, and therefore to be carefully kept, but the bad shall be cast away, as vile and unprofitable; and miserable is the condition of those who are cast away in that day. While the net is in the sea, it is not known what is in it, the fishermen themselves cannot distinguish; but they carefully draw it, and all that is in it, to the shore, for the sake of the good that is in it. Such is God’s care for the visible church, and such should ministers’ concern be for those under their charge, though they are mixed.’ (MHC)
The parable is illustrative of God’s judgement at the end of the age. In contrast to the parable of the weeds, it does not draw attention to the co-existence of the righteous and the wicked.
The principal truth taught by this parable is the reality of God’s judgement at the end of the age. In contrast to the parable of the weeds, it does not draw attention to the co-existence of the righteous and the wicked. In other respects, however, these two parables are closely linked, and the explanation of each is very similar. ‘The net echoes the last “act” of the parable of the weeds, the sorting out of good from bad.’ (France) According to this writer, ‘the reference, as in the weeds, is not primarily to a mixed church, but to the division among mankind in general which the last judgement will bring to light.’
‘(See on Mt 13:42). We have said that each of these two parables holds forth the same truth under a slight diversity of aspect. What is that diversity? First, the bad, in the former parable, are represented as vile seed sown among the wheat by the enemy of souls; in the latter, as foul fish drawn forth out of the great sea of human beings by the Gospel net itself. Both are important truths-that the Gospel draws within its pale, and into the communion of the visible Church, multitudes who are Christians only in name; and that the injury thus done to the Church on earth is to be traced to the wicked one. But further, while the former parable gives chief prominence to the present mixture of good and bad, in the latter, the prominence is given to the future separation of the two classes.’ (JFB)
The message of this parable is that ‘not all that are attracted by the message of the kingdom exhibit genuine discipleship and are thus suitable for participation in God’s eternal kingdom.’ (College Press)
‘Christ himself preached often of hell-torments, as the everlasting punishment of hypocrites; and it is good for us to be often reminded of this awakening, quickening truth.’ (MHC)
‘The solemn part of the judgement is, that those who are to be separated from each other were together in the Church of Christ upon the earth. And so the warning comes with terrible power, to the effect that mere membership in the church gives no guarantee of everlasting felicity. Read the concluding sections of the Sermon on the Mount, and you will understand better, perhaps, the Saviour’s meaning here. It is not enough that you have eaten and drunk in Christ’s presence, and that you have been active in working in and for the church: the question is, Are you in Christ? It is not enough that you are growing in the field of the church: the question is, Are you wheat, or tares? are you Christ’s in heart and soul and character, as well as by profession and position? It is not enough that you are enclosed in the net of the church: the question, after all, is, Are you good or bad in it?’ (Taylor, The Parables of our Saviour, 53)
13:51 “Have you understood all these things?” They replied, “Yes.” 13:52 Then he said to them, “Therefore every expert in the law who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his treasure what is new and old.”
“All these things” – probably refers to the entire discourse. ‘Our Lord’s enquiry is an admirable example of real heart-searching application.’ (Ryle) The mere hearing of a Christian message is worthless: we might as well listen to the beating of a drum or a lecture in some foreign language. No: the mind must be engaged, the thoughts set in motion, there must be real instruction and real understanding. How many within our congregations could tell you, at the end of a day, or a week, or a year, what they had learned. It is to be feared that many of our church members are as ignorant as the heathen. The Holy Spirit generally reaches the heart via the mind.
‘Christ’s putting this question to the disciples, shows that the things delivered, had some difficulty in them; that they were of moment and importance to be understood; and how concerned he was, that they should understand them; and how ready he was to communicate the knowledge of them, which he knew would be useful to them in their after ministrations.’ (Gill)
“Yes,” they replied – And yet subsequent events would call into question their self-assessment, cf. Mt 15:15-16; 16:9. The assertion that the present verse is a flat contradiction of Mk 8:21 therefore carries little weight.
v52 Although not usually included in lists of Jesus’ parables, this verse resembles them in both form and content.
“Teacher of the law” – grammateus = lit. ‘scribe’. “Instructed” – matheteuo = lit. ‘discipled’. The learner becomes a teacher.
“Instructed about the kingdom of heaven” – ‘That is, understands the nature of the Gospel church state, the discipline, laws, and rules of Christ’s house, the doctrines of the Gospel, the way and things pertaining to the kingdom of heaven; as Christ and his righteousness, and the regenerating and sanctifying grace of the Spirit.’ (Gill) ‘The instruction of a gospel minister must be in the kingdom of heaven, that is it about which his business lies. A man may be a great philosopher and politician, and yet if not instructed to the kingdom of heaven, he will make but a bad minister.’ (MHC)
“Like the owner of a house” – ‘as the ministers of the Gospel are, and the house is the church of God; called the household of God, the household of faith, a spiritual house, and a family; consisting of fathers, young men, and children; of which indeed Christ is properly the householder and master, but Gospel ministers are deputies and stewards under him, and under him preside over the household, and have the government of it, provide food for it, and protect and defend it; all which require large gifts and abilities, great love and affection, both to Christ and his people; much wisdom, prudence, and knowledge; and great faithfulness and integrity, courage and firmness of mind.’ (Gill)
“New treasures as well as old” – There may be an allusion to the relevance of the OT scriptures (old treasures) and to the new order brought about by Christ (new treasures). If this is the case, then this verse supports that assertion that ‘the Old Testament continues to have relevance for the disciple, but only as it is understood in the light of Jesus’ new teachings (cf. Mt 5:17-19). Being trained in the priorities and values of the kingdom provides disciples with a hermeneutical lens through which to read and interpret Scripture. Such training is critical if the disciples are to realize their calling to become “fishers of men.” ‘ (College Press)
Craig Evans thinks that this saying reflects the pedagogical values of the time, in which a disciple demonstrated that he had grasped his master’s message, not simply be being able to repeat it parrot-fashion, but by being able to paraphrase, summarise, and elaborate that message. Evans sees this at play in the Synoptic Gospels, and even more so in the Gospel of John, where words are sometimes put into Jesus mouth that reflect the truth about Jesus, but not what he actually said. Such teaching would be referred to as ‘chreia’ (pl. ‘chrei’). Unfortunately, Evans seems unwilling to state clearly the extent to which he things the teaching ascribed to Jesus in the Gospels is the creative work of his followers. See this.
‘The scribal language may suggest that the “things new and old” are a deliberate contrast with the official scribes of Israel, who can produce only what is old because they have not discovered the new secrets of the kingdom of heaven. Yet those secrets themselves are not really “new;” they are “things hidden since the foundation of the world,” (v. 35) and it is only their revelation which is new. If Jesus’ disciples have indeed “understood” these old/new truths (v. 51), they are now in a position to offer more adequate provision for God’s household, and this parable challenges them to “bring it out” for the benefit of others.’ (France, NICNT)
‘See here what should be a minister’s furniture, a treasure of things new and old. Those who have so many and various occasions, have need to stock themselves well in their gathering days with truths new and old, out of the Old Testament and out of the new; with ancient and modern improvements, that the man of God may be thoroughly furnished, 2 Tim 3:16,17. Old experiences, and new observations, all have their use; and we must not content ourselves with old discoveries, but must be adding new. Live and learn.’ (MHC)
‘A minister should be like the father of a family: distributing to the church as it needs; and out of his treasures bringing forth truth to confirm the feeble, enlighten the ignorant, and guide those in danger of straying away.’ (Barnes)
This little parable suggests a number of qualities of the true scribe:- (a) he must be adequately trained; (b) he is rich in the eyes of God; (c) he has the responsibility of providing for others; (d) he must provide treasures old and new. ‘A skilful, faithful minister of the gospel, is a scribe, well versed in the things of the gospel, and able to teach them. Christ compares him to a good householder, who brings forth fruits of last year’s growth and this year’s gathering, abundance and variety, to entertain his friends. Old experiences and new observations, all have their use. Our place is at Christ’s feet, and we must daily learn old lessons over again, and new ones also.’ (MHCC)
Rejection at Nazareth, 53-58
13:53 Now when Jesus finished these parables, he moved on from there. 13:54 Then he came to his hometown and began to teach the people in their synagogue. They were astonished and said, “Where did this man get such wisdom and miraculous powers? 13:55 Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother named Mary? And aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? 13:56 And aren’t all his sisters here with us? Where did he get all this?” 13:57 And so they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own house.” 13:58 And he did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief.
His hometown – Probably Nazareth is meant, even though Jesus had moved to Capernaum.
Of Nazareth, Edwards (on Mark) notes: ‘Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, in Josephus, or in the rabbinic literature of the Mishnah and the Talmud. Outside the dozen references to it in the NT, it is first mentioned by an obscure writer, Julius Africanus, some two centuries after Jesus’ birth. No church was built in Nazareth until the time of Constantine (a.d. 325). Archaeological excavations beneath the imposing Churches of the Annunciation and St. Joseph in Nazareth have uncovered a series of grottoes that date to the time of Jesus. The resultant picture is of an obscure hamlet of earthen dwellings chopped into sixty acres of rocky hillside, with a total population of five hundred — at the most.’
“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son?” – The parallel passage, Mk 6:3, has, “Isn’t this the carpenter?” Of course, this is a record of what the people ‘said’, and some of them may have said one thing, and others another. That would be unsurprising, because in that culture a son would usually follow his father’s trade. The main point is that they all knew that Jesus had not had a rabbi’s upbringing and education.
Spong’s theory (Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, p137) that the change from Mark’s account to Matthew’s (which he dates fifteen to twenty years later) is due to the difficulty that the early church had with the idea that Jesus was a humble carpenter, and to growing power of ‘the myth’. This is, of course, to build one conjecture upon another. The comment is not, after all, a ‘biographical notes’, as Spong suggests, but rather a record of what some people were saying about Jesus.
During Jesus’ youth, Herod Antipas had hired local artisans to work on his residence at Sepphoris, just 4 miles north of Nazareth. It is possible that he and his father had been employed on that project.
“Isn’t his mother’s name Mary?” – The implication could be that Joseph was dead. Alternatively, there may be a hint here of the virgin birth. Cf. Mt 13:55, which has ‘the carpenter’s son’, and Lk 4:22, ‘Joseph’s son’.
Edwards (on Mark) cites Bauckham, who thinks that this phrase suggests ‘may have been intended to distinguish Jesus from the children of Joseph by a former marriage.’ But, writes Edwards, this is not supported by the context, which shows that the crowd’s comments were intended to discredit Jesus; whereas ‘the meaning Bauckham suggests would scarcely have been a reason to “take offense at him.”’
“His brothers” – Again, there may be a hint here of rumours of a virgin birth: ‘obviously, he can’t be born of a virgin if he has brothers and sisters.’
“James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas” – There is a possible link here with Matthew’s genealogy. It was common in those days for a first son to be named after his grandfather, and the second after his father. Here, James, the first son to be born to Joseph and Mary, is named after his grandfather (Jacob = James), and Joseph after his father, Mt 1:16. (The name of ‘Jesus’ was, of course, given by an angel, Mt 1:21, and so neither the grandfather’s nor the father’s name was an option in his case). See this by Peter J. Williams.
Perpetual virginity? ‘The idea that Mary remained a virgin was widely taught by the fourth century and was later affirmed by church councils. It is taught today by Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodoxy, but not by Protestants (although Martin Luther held to it). Matthew 1:25 declares that Joseph “did not know [Mary] intimately until she gave birth to a son.” The “until” most naturally implies that Mary and Joseph were sexually intimate at some point after Jesus’ birth, leading to the birth of children who would have been Jesus’ half-siblings.’ (HAC)
They took offense at him – Familiarity breeds contempt. The word skandalizein occurs eight times in Mark (Mk 4:17; 6:3; 9:42, 43, 45, 47; 14:27, 29), and ‘in each instance it designates obstructions that prevent one from coming to faith and following Jesus’ (Edwards, on Mark).
He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief –
Matthew smooths out Mark’s ‘could not’ into ‘did not’. As Hurtado points out, ‘this is the sort of evidence that prompts most scholars to believe that the writer of Matthew wrote after Mark and used Mark’s Gospel as a source, making numerous editorial changes such as this one.’
‘God allows our unbelief to limit his activity. Mark says that Jesus “could not” do a miracle in Nazareth because of the people’s unbelief, (Mk 6:5) probably meaning that Jesus refused to act as a mere magician but demanded faith (Goppelt 1981:148). Matthew clarifies the wording: Jesus did not (would not) act because of their unbelief (Mt 13:58). Those who are hostile to God’s purposes cannot complain because they do not receive the attestations of his power that appear regularly among those who believe him. We should keep in mind, however, that the issue here is the hostility of antibelief, not a young Christian’s struggles with doubt; sometimes God does sovereignly act on behalf of his own to develop faith, not just to reward it (compare Mt 17:2-7; 28:5-10, 17; Ex 3:2; Judg 6:12-14).’ (IVP NT Commentary)
Ryle’s comment appears to be consistent with his advocacy of general (rather than particular) atonement – an advocacy which receives yet great emphasis in his notes on John’s Gospel:
‘Behold in this single word the secret of the everlasting ruin of multitudes of souls! They perish for ever, because they will not believe. There is nothing beside in earth or heaven that prevents their salvation. Their sins, however many, might all be forgiven. The Father’s love is ready to receive them. The blood of Christ is ready to cleanse them. The power of the Spirit is ready to renew them. But a great barrier interposes;—they will not believe. “Ye will not come unto me,” says Jesus, “that ye might have life.” (John 5:40.)
‘May we all be on our guard against this accursed sin. It is the old root-sin, which caused the fall of man. Cut down in the true child of God by the power of the Spirit, it is ever ready to bud and sprout again. There are three great enemies against which God’s children should daily pray,—pride, worldliness, and unbelief. Of these three, none is greater than unbelief.’