New Thoughts (2/17/07-2/23/07)
I have to admit that as I began to study this section of the text my first reaction was to ask myself why I hadn’t included the first parts of Mark’s and Luke’s versions under the previous heading in my outline. Being that it has been a few years since I first set down the outline, the original reasoning evaded me. Now, I think I recollect why I chose this arrangement. Matthew presents the disciples to us as coming with a more general question regarding the reason for teaching in parables. He also provides a much lengthier response from Jesus. With Mark and Luke, the question is more directly connected to the particular parable of the seed and the earth it fell upon.
In fairness, I feel quite sure that all three are covering the same discussion. It would not seem improbable that the question we have in Matthew’s account came first and, satisfied on that matter, they then broached the subject of this one particular parable. One thing to bear in mind is that they did not just suddenly stop Jesus as this parable finished and ask Him what He was getting at. We find Jesus in the midst of a fairly lengthy teaching here, and out on a boat to boot. How exactly were they going to get Him alone in that setting? They weren’t. They waited until later, when the teaching had finished and the crowds dispersed. Mark tells us that it wasn’t until He was alone that they came to Him. I have to say that manifests a certain degree of patient perseverance on their part! Many would have grown tired of the wait and just walked off with their questions unanswered.
Another important detail that comes out of Mark’s account is that it was not just the Apostles who came to Jesus. It was not the inner circle. They were there, but they were not alone. In fact, Mark identifies the rest simply as His followers. Arguably, this number included all of those from the beach that were earnestly seeking to heed the teaching of Messiah. To a man, these came to Jesus at the first opportunity. “As soon as He was alone,” they were there with their questions. They were there to learn from Him what they had not been able to grasp on their own. In spite of the way we probably hear Jesus’ reaction to this, I think He was likely pleased to see how earnestly they were in pursuit of understanding.
With this in sight, I come to what I consider to be a doctrinal truth that is on display in this interaction of Teacher and disciples. Those who ask God for wisdom receive it. That is exactly what we see playing out in this scene. Many who heard His words just walked off no more informed than they came. They hadn’t really come to hear a teaching. They had come for a show. They had come to be entertained, and this wasn’t really cutting it. I know I wrote of this point in my previous study here, so I won’t pursue it much further at this point. It is worth recognizing, though, how Jesus honors those who are actively seeking to know Him and to know His Truth. “If any lacks wisdom, let him ask it of God, and God will surely give it.” Here, the truth of James is being walked out. They asked. He gave.
Again, He does not simply spoon feed them. They are not children. They have proven that they have ears that long to hear and eyes that seek to comprehend what is before them. They have shown a degree of maturity in this. To have simply said, “look guys, the point is not to get discouraged by how you’re received when you go out in My name”, would have shortchanged the process of understanding. It would have done less for them than the more detailed explanation they received, even though that explanation left them standing just shy of the point.
One recalls the adage about teaching a man to fish versus simply giving him the fish. Jesus is teaching His disciples how to fish for the Truth He is speaking. “It has been granted you to know.” This is not going to be one of those classes where you can just turn to the back of the book and the answers to all the odd questions are right there for you. No. The answers are all there, and everything you need to find the answers is provided. You will, however, still have to find the answer. You will have to invest the effort necessary to gain the understanding. The Teacher has now given you the tools, and explained their use. They will remain useless to you, though, unless you now put them to use.
This leaves me in mind of another point I have pursued in the course of this study of the Gospels. That point concerns the whole armor of God which Paul recommends to our use. This comes up now, I suppose, because it was returned to my thinking by yesterday’s men’s meeting at church. The point is this: That armor which God so richly provides to all His children will be no more than a useless pile of metal if we don’t put it on. The sword he has honored us with will do no good if it remains in its sheath. Even outside of its sheath it will remain a useless thing if we do not train ourselves in its use.
So it is with the things Jesus provides in His teaching. He gives us the tools of understanding, and not just of understanding but of wisdom. Wisdom applies what we understand. That is why He moves His disciples towards not just the intuitive knowledge that comes of reasoning something out, but the intimate, experiential knowledge of things we have lived out, things internalized and made an integral part of who we are. This point is brought out by the question He asks before providing them with the keys. In translation, it seems to me, some of the impact of His question is lost. It seems to be simply, “Don’t you get it? If you can’t get this one, how will you get the rest?” We have, “If you don’t understand, how will you understand?” However, there is a distinction to be had between how Jesus refers to their understanding this particular parable and the understanding He speaks of with regard to the others.
Speaking of this parable, He asks if it really the case that they haven’t intuited the point of it. The word is eido, the knowledge gained by intuition. They have seen and heard, and they have had time to think upon what they have seen and heard. Of course, the Teacher hopes and expects that they will have reasoned their way to His point. However, if the illustration is not sufficient to bring such a reasoned understanding, how are they ever going to make the meaning of all these parables a part of themselves? How will they ginosko? They will need to reach that point of absolute knowledge, knowledge held so closely and so intimately that it becomes a part of them.
Remember that these are the same ones Jesus has just declared have been granted the gift of knowing the mystery of the kingdom of God in just such an intimate fashion. This does not mean that they are to know the mysteries by direct revelation. Neither does it mean that they won’t be given such direct revelation. It is not the means of knowledge so much as the degree and depth of that knowledge that is a gift. Many people know what Jesus said. Many even understand the point of what Jesus said. But, few really take it to heart. Few shape their lives by what they understand of Him.
When I hear that question from Jesus, my first reaction is to hear it rather like I might ask it. I hear that sense of exasperation. If you can’t even figure this one out, what hope is there for you on the rest? It’s a frustrated voice, complaining of the effort it’s going to take to drag these dimwits to some degree of usefulness. That image may fit with my character, but I would be hard pressed to fit it with the character of Jesus. Jesus the Teacher had an agenda in His teaching, as I have written elsewhere. He had a definite intent of training up these disciples to continue the work He was beginning. To do so, they needed to have a deep, thorough and unshakable comprehension of what He was about. The parable of the sower, again pursuing a thought from elsewhere in this study, was all about encouraging these coworkers of His in the effort they would be undertaking as His messengers.
I begin to think that we ought to hear these questions more as Jesus almost talking to Himself. I don’t think He’s really trying to embarrass these men for their inability to get this matter for themselves. I think He is more thinking that He will need to adjust His style somewhat, at least on this occasion, so that they will not be wandering down the wrong road in their thinking. In the last section of this study, I considered the point that these guys had had time to think about the message. This question doesn’t come fast on the heels of the parable being spoken. Much more had been said and heard before this private time came. They had doubtless both thought about and discussed what the meaning might be, and apart from the understanding Jesus imparts here, several possibilities exist as to what He’s driving at.
So, once again take note that Jesus does not spoon feed these men with the answer. He really doesn’t come out with the point of the parable, only the definitions by which that point becomes clear. Here’s the key, disciples: The sower sows the seed of the word of God. The soil in its varied condition represents the hearers of the sower’s message. Now, do you get it? In fact, looking at Luke’s account of this, I can almost see Him connecting the quote from Isaiah with the following, “Now this is the parable.” If you have the right definition of what is the seed and what is the soil, everything else falls into place, and the meaning of the parable, its higher application, should become clear. He’s not going to tell them outright, because He doesn’t think them idiots. They just need that little bit of extra steering to arrive at the right port.
Both Mark and Luke have Jesus beginning His explanation with clearly identified statements of what is key to understanding the parable. From Luke’s account: “The seed is the word of God,” and from Mark’s: “The sower sows the word.” Now, the Bible in Basic English takes that verse from Luke as saying that this is the point of the story. As I have already said, though, Jesus isn’t giving them the point, only the key to discerning the point. I might rather have taken this verse as “Unlock the parable with this:” Then, in the New Living Translation of Mark’s version, I find “The farmer plants seed by taking God’s word to others.” Well, all of this clearly takes a certain amount of liberty with the text as received. That text simply says, “The parable is this:” in Luke, and “The sower sows the word” in Mark.
All of these efforts, my own included, attempt to reach into the intended meaning of what Jesus says, even as the disciples must expend effort – even after this explanation – to reach into the intended meaning of the parable. Given the method of parable, as well as the examples of both Jesus and the Apostles in their handling of the text of Scripture, I don’t think we have reason for concern in thus seeking to dig behind the words, as it were. There are sufficient examples from the text of Scripture of those who were far more concerned with accurately conveying the point of the text than with displaying their skills at memorization. It would not surprise me overly much if it were shown that the Devil is the most accurate at quoting Scripture verbatim that we can find within its pages. He is a literalist and a legalist, and will seek to use that to his advantage in avoiding the true meaning and intent. The Apostolic example is to present the meaning and intent by ‘rightly dividing’ the Word.
Every paraphrase, whether my own or that of one of these less than literal translations of the Bible, is seeking to rightly divide and present the Word. We do so with our best understanding of the overall message of God’s Word. But it must be said that we do so with our best understanding at the time. I have often found that between the point of arriving at my paraphrase, and the time I spend here really chewing on the message of a passage, my sense of how that paraphrase ought to be put may change. This does not so much invalidate my original attempt as display the simple fact that God’s Word is rich, and it takes more than a moment’s reflection to delve into that richness.
So, while I would disagree with the BBE’s presentation of this as being the point of the parable, it is certainly the key. If we don’t understand that the seed is the Word, then we cannot grasp the significance of what is said about the results of scattering that seed. Indeed, if we have that statement from Luke’s account indicating that the seed is the Word, what we have from Mark’s becomes more a reinforcement of the point. We might combine them in either order. We could say that the seed is the word of God, and this is what the sower sows, or we could say that the sower sows the seed which is the word of God. I would suspect that the former order was more likely to have been the case, not that it matters all that much. It simply leaves the key factor of this parable well reinforced in the minds of His disciples. Now we understand exactly what He is talking about, and as He discusses the response found in soils of various condition, we can quickly grasp what He is telling us.
With that, let me turn my own attention to the discussion of soil conditions. From Matthew’s account, the issue with roadside soil is that it does not understand the seed. These are people who hear, but aren’t interested in figuring out what it is they are hearing. They do not connect with the message. It passes over them. They might find it entertaining to some degree, but it doesn’t mean anything to them in the end. Here, we are being introduced to yet another term for understanding, sunientos. This term is rather interesting. Zhodiates describes it as describing ‘the activity of knowing’. We have seen eido representing the logical approach to knowledge, reasoning out the point. We have seen ginosko representing the things which experience has taught us most intimately. This one lies somewhere in between. Thayer’s speaks of this understanding as joining perception and the thing perceived. Clearly then, without the perception of eido, it would have nothing to work with. On the other end of the spectrum, if we have not so joined the data with its meaning, we have no means of making the meaning integral to our being. We cannot become intimate with an understanding we don’t have.
Another aspect of this understanding of the sunientos sort, probably the most literal and basic aspect, is that it is a matter of collecting all the bits together to make the whole. It’s the big picture sort of understanding. We can have all the data before us, but not have the wherewithal to put the pieces together in any sort of comprehensible fashion. Somewhere amongst the definitions was the sense of have the parts of a jigsaw puzzle scattered before you and putting those pieces together correctly. So, the first soil that Jesus describes is representative of the listener who is given all these puzzle pieces but can’t be bothered to put the pieces together. Notice that He does not say they can’t do it. He says the don’t. Big difference. It is this lackadaisical approach to the Word that allows the devil to come and take it away so easily. If you’re not interested in solving the puzzle, what do you care about the puzzle pieces?
Another aspect of this understanding of the sunientos sort, probably the most literal and basic aspect, is that it is a matter of collecting all the bits together to make the whole. It’s the big picture sort of understanding. We can have all the data before us, but not have the wherewithal to put the pieces together in any sort of comprehensible fashion. Somewhere amongst the definitions was the sense of have the parts of a jigsaw puzzle scattered before you and putting those pieces together correctly. So, the first soil that Jesus describes is representative of the listener who is given all these puzzle pieces but can’t be bothered to put the pieces together. Notice that He does not say they can’t do it. He says the don’t. Big difference. It is this lackadaisical approach to the Word that allows the devil to come and take it away so easily. If you’re not interested in solving the puzzle, what do you care about the puzzle pieces?
If we are serious about our Christianity, then we ought to be looking to see how fruitful we are becoming. It is a test I suggested His disciples ought to have been thinking about after hearing this explanation. It is a test I can’t help but think we ought to likewise be thinking about after hearing it. How’s my soil? Yes, I am growing, but is there evidence of fruitfulness? What sort of harvest am I going to bring, given the quality of my growth? Well, if we are not satisfied with what we are seeing, the next two soils that Jesus discusses may help us to understand why. These two forms of soil represent two forms of dissuasion that may keep the Word from bearing fruit in our lives. The first obstacle is trouble that comes our way because of the Word. The second is trouble that comes our way quite apart from the Word.
The source of these troubles is no different than the source of the stolen seed that plagued the first soil type. It is a matter of the effort that enemy requires to spoil the land of our lives and the degree of resistance and preparedness we manifest. That first soil took no effort to despoil. It wasn’t interested in growing anyway, so it didn’t take a lot to slip in and eliminate the seed. The second soil is at least willing to accept the seed of the Word. Perhaps we can look at it as that soil that has an intellectual curiosity in what Jesus is teaching. It is a people that wants to understand the point, but having understood is quite satisfied. There’s no interest in applying that knowledge, just having it is enough.
This is the issue that many of the scribes had. It is an issue that much of modern Christianity suffers from, particularly in the more liberal branches. It is the issue of accepting Jesus as a fine teacher, but refusing Him as God Incarnate. These are, as we might say, the social Christians. So long as it is socially acceptable and profitable to be identified as a Christian, they’re in. But, the moment that trials begin to come because of that profession, they’re out. As Steven Taylor put it in one of his songs, “you’ll march if all the streets are full – a two-bit, closet radical.” Wow! Contrast that with the spirit of one like Caleb, who stood for God’s purpose even when the majority was counseling against him. Contrast that with a John the Baptist, who clung to God even to the death. Contrast that with the martyrs of the Church through the ages, or with the Reformers who were willing to stand against all the threats of Rome to see the Truth of the Gospel restored to the Church.
Here, then, we have been granted to see the second attack of our enemy. Those whom he cannot blind outright he will attack with the opposition forces of antichrist. Many, however, will withstand such attacks, recognizing the opposition for what it is. Only the weakest are shaken by such an obvious assault. As trained warriors in the camp of Christ we certainly ought to be able to hold off this enemy at the gates. He is clearly the enemy. There is no disguise of the troops, little or no cleverness in the attack. It is a frontal attack seeking to overwhelm green recruits. It is, if you will, the first training exercise for God’s army. When that fails to breach the walls the father of lies returns to truer form, the form of deception.
If the frontal assault fails, go for the sneak attack. Now, having been reminded of Caleb in this, I have to note that the devil is not alone in this philosophy of war. The same idea is present in the camp of Israel when they approach Ai. They attempted the frontal assault and they were repelled. Granted, this had more to do with the sin in their camp than with the strength of those holding the city. But, at this point, it is God’s counsel for the follow up that I have in view. It is He who counsels Joshua to provide a feint, and then come with the ambush. He advises that the bulk of the army approach in what would clearly seem another frontal attack whilst holding a special force in reserve and out of sight. Those in the main force would turn and run when Ai’s defenses came to life, looking for all the world like another rout. As Ai’s army left the city to take the field, the reserve force would leave the field to take the city. The defenders would be left caught in the middle of Israel’s army, neither able to advance nor to retreat.
The attack of the thorny soil is similar in nature. Satan has seen that he cannot succeed by frontal assault. The camp of God is aware of such a danger and on their guard against it. So, he keeps them occupied with the danger they recognize. He keeps that frontal assault going, even though he knows it will, in itself fail of its goal. However, he has another goal in mind: distraction. While he has us caught up with defending our front lines, he comes sneaking around the back. If trouble because of the Word doesn’t take us down, he’ll try the artful use of trouble quite apart from the Word.
Certainly, we’re on our guard. Certainly, we can stand up for God against a godless world. But, while we’re putting all our energy into this defensive action, many forget to protect themselves against the distractions of the world. We feel like we’re doing alright in the God department. We’re regularly in the Word, constant in attending the fellowship of the saints, doing our best to tackle the issues of sin in our lives, and even gaining the upper hand there. But, even as we see ourselves doing so well, we lose sight of God in the workplace. We get caught up in the efforts of providing for ourselves, attending to the needs of home and family. Before we know it, we’re caught up not just in the needs, but in the desires that are assaulting us from all sides. Here in America we are in the midst of a culture of desire. The majority of our commerce is wrapped up in creating, promoting and feeding desire. The one thing this culture does not promote is satisfying desire, for satisfaction would end the market.
The issue of thorny ground, then, is the issue of admixture – of syncretism. If the stony ground was lost due to opposition to Christ, the thorny ground is lost to the companionship of the world. The world view of unbelief is forever seeking to work itself into the Church, to make the Church more like itself so that it needn’t be troubled by the sight of the Church any more. So, we find a church that is almost indistinguishable from the culture around it. Our commitment to marriage is not much different than what is found outside. Our concern for modesty and decency is not much different than what is found outside. Our tastes in the arts are not much different. Our definitions of beauty are not much different. Our lifestyle is not much different. Soon, the ways of the world, having found an inroad, take over and whatever growth there had been in the kingdom of God is choked out. The ranks of the army of God are thinned by this sneak attack. But, the remnant remains strong.
The lesson from this is to be on your guard, lest you fall. Even, as Scripture has warned: let him who thinks he is standing beware. You have weathered the frontal attack. You have stood your ground in the face of severest criticism of your faith. For this, you are rightly praised. But, beware! Look to your faith, and make certain that it is unchanging. Make certain that your beliefs remain true to the Word, not conformed to the world. Watch out, lest the message of the Gospel be crowed out by the cares, the riches and the pleasures of this life. This world is not your home. These riches are not your treasure. They will pass from you with the passing of the flesh. Your treasure is in your true home, the mansion God has prepared for you in His house. That treasure remains. Take heed! Look for that sneak attack of world view. Have you fallen into thinking everything’s relative? Take heed! Have you come to think that all roads lead to God? Beware! He has told you there is only one Road. Have you begun to wink at your sins, because God is Love? Look out! God is also Justice. God is also Righteous and True, who will come on His white horse to judge the quick and the dead. Therefore, look to your sanctification with fear and trembling. Stand and stand some more. Let your mind be renewed and shaped by the pure Word of God, and shed every vain imagination that reflects no more than the wisdom of this dying world. Don’t conform. Be transformed!
In considering the good and fruitful ground that receives the seed and is well tended as the seed grows, I am going to focus more on Luke’s coverage than the others. For one thing, reading in the other accounts, it seems we get distracted by the measures of return that Jesus uses. There is the distraction of wondering which order He really listed them in and the distraction of focusing on the prosperity aspect. Neither of these is relevant to the point Jesus is making. No, that’s not quite true. There is relevance in describing the magnitude of the return which the good soil produces, in that it displays victory triumphing over defeat. It displays how the gains to the kingdom that come of what does take root and grow well will far exceed the losses of that which does not. We may find only a quarter of those who hear the Word really take it to heart. Really, that may even be a bit high as estimates go. But the return on that quarter will outstrip the losses that accrued during the sowing. Even if the return is only thirty-fold, those losses are covered and there is profit to boot.
When I look at Luke’s account, though, the accent on return is taken away. What remains is a picture of fruitfulness, but here the focus is on how that fruitfulness has come about. It is really a question of what makes good soil good. Well, there is something at risk of being lost in the translation here. Jesus speaks of good soil and He speaks of a good heart. In translation, we have nothing to discern whether there is a difference in what Jesus says of these two. In the Greek, this problem disappears. Jesus describes the soil as kalee, harmonious and complete. It is well-balanced, and well adapted for its purpose. In essence, He is describing quality and condition rather than character and intention. Soil can be good for growing, but it cannot have any intention of being so. It simply is or it isn’t. It has had no say in the matter, nor does it seek a say.
Jesus does use this same word to describe the heart, although – at least in my translation – it is translated as a different word. When speaking of the heart, the translators choose to take this as meaning honest. Honesty is evidence of that balanced completeness and proper adaptation to the purpose of the heart. The purpose of the heart is righteousness. Honesty befits an organ with such purpose. However, Jesus doesn’t stop there. It’s not enough that the heart is fitted and able to pursue its proper purpose. All the ability in the world won’t help if there is no will and intention of pursuing what one has been enabled to do. So, the heart must be more than kalee. It must also be agathee. It must have the intention of doing good, of seeking the good not only of itself but of others. This is what qualifies the heart as not only well fit to its task, but acceptable to God because it is actively pursuing its task. It may not be perfected in this life, but it is actively seeking to go the right way.
Such a heart, when it hears the Word, hears the opportunity to fulfill what it has always wanted to do. Such a heart knew its purpose, but knew not how to attain to that purpose. Here, in the words of the Word, God reveals the means. He plants the seed. He imparts not only the knowledge of how it might be done, but the wisdom to connect that understanding with action. The mind alone cannot move the body. This may not hold in strictest physiological terms, but it is certainly true in metaphysical terms. The mind can fully understand how to make the body do this or that, but until the heart gets involved, the body won’t budge. The heart must will and desire what the mind knows or the knowledge of the mind will be vanity and wind.
It is because of this that the heart must be both honest and good. It must not only be equipped to its purpose, but willing. If it is unwilling, it has just been classified as one or the other of the remaining soil types.
This leads to what must be a very personal question: Which of these soil types best describes my current response to God? Am I refusing to hear, hearing only with the emotions, hearing and forgetting as the distractions of the day come, or hearing and taking it to heart? In that last respect, I think of Mary, who kept all these things in her heart and really meditated on them. That’s the good soil. Notice that her fruit was not immediate in coming forth, but it came, and with her came her children. Indeed, a good return.
I have to admit that some of what I have just been writing has really been written to myself, particularly this: “The heart must will and desire what the mind knows or the knowledge of the mind will be vanity and wind.” This is my struggle. There are battles I face, battles that my spirit knows I must be victorious in because He is with me. I know the way to victory, although the whisperings of my foe seek to convince me otherwise. My mind is fully cognizant of the cost of defeat and how to avoid it. But, even with all that, it is the heart that controls. So long as a desire remains to keep going down the road to defeat, all the knowledge of the mind can only scream warnings that the heart refuses to hear.
Let me say this: This will not be my story. My Lord and Savoir is faithful. This is a description of my present state, but it is not the description of my final state. This I speak by faith in my God and King. He Who has begun this work, and He has left me no room to doubt that it was His doing from the start, is faithful to complete it. His heart is always willing. Therefore, in spite of this present struggle, I have in Him strength to persevere.
This is an interesting word, perseverance. It must be said that in perseverance alone, there is no assurance of success. That assurance is actually the strength that impels perseverance. Perseverance, we should understand, is not a matter of putting up with people. If you feel you are surrounded by idiots but you must do what you can to make it anyway, you may speak of persevering, but this is not persevering. Persevering is a matter of enduring not people, but circumstances. It is a quality that does not surrender or succumb, says Zhodiates. This is not to say that it won’t know moments of being near to crushed. Apart from such moments there is nothing to endure, is there? Do we endure joyful and peaceful moments? No. Those are for savoring. Do we persevere through the good times? Only in the sense of not allowing the good to distract us from the Best.
At its core, though, perseverance endures. Now, notice this from Strong’s definition of the word. It not only endures, but it endures cheerfully. It doesn’t plunk down at the side of the road lost in tears, bewailing its horrible, horrible misfortune. It may plunk down for a breather, but it is not there to wallow in despondency. Perseverance is cheerful. Whatever may be opposing us, whatever may be crushing us, we remain cheerful because we know that in spite of it all we have a hope and a future. That hope is not a wishful thinking sort of hope, it’s a known with a certainty sort of hope. Wishful thinking doesn’t have a future, just an idea of what might be nice as a future. Hope has a future. It knows what the future holds, and it knows that certain future is for good and not for evil. So, perseverance clings to that certain hope and is cheered by it even in the hardest moments. Whatever may come, it can be patient. Whatever may come, it will not be shaken to its roots because its roots are deep in the rich soil of the Word. And so, as the Bible in Basic English phrases it, the seed of the Word in such a well-fitted, well-intentioned heart ‘in quiet strength gives fruit.’
What a wonderful description! What better epitaph might one wish for? “In quiet strength, he bore fruit.” I don’t need noise and notoriety. That just puffs up a worthless cloud of pride. I don’t need fame and recognition, brass bands announcing me wherever I go. I don’t need newspaper headlines or any manner of recognition that man might devise. I don’t need a life of nonstop gratification. I don’t need to have every least whim and desire fulfilled. That’s the worldly mindset. I may partake of this and that from the coffers of the world as my Lord provides, but I don’t need that. My only need is God and His wisdom infusing my heart and making it a fruitful ground for His purposes. Seek that, and everything else follows. Seek that, and there is power to wait patient and steadfast, face set cheerfully toward that certain future of a family reunion in heaven. That is the ‘attitude of gratitude,’ as my pastor likes to say, which God can grow marvelous and abundant fruit in.
One final matter to pursue: In Mark’s account, Jesus refers to the roadside earth folks as ‘those who are outside’. The parallel verses listed for that particular phrase led me to a powerful combination of scriptures. It’s one of those cases when seeing these verses from various points collected in one place brings forth a powerful sermon of its own. In this case, I suppose it is Paul’s sermon since all of the verses in question come from his epistles. To the Corinthians he writes that it is not his job to judge outsiders, nor any other man’s (1Co 5:12-13). If there is a place for God’s people to judge, it is within the Church, not without. God is the only one authorized to judge ‘those who are outside.’ Our mission is involved with those inside. There we are to judge righteously and remove the wicked from our midst. Two immediate reactions to this point: First, how does this square with the parable of the tares amidst the wheat (Mt 13:24-30), wherein Jesus seems to be telling us to avoid trying to do this ourselves? Second, if we are not concerned with those outside, where’s the motivation for missions? For that matter, where’s Paul’s motivation and authorization? After all, everybody who is now inside was outside at one time.
While I have not really considered either passage in depth at this point, let me attempt to answer the first concern as best I may. Jesus, in the parable, addresses a body of mixed estate. There are the believers and there are the poseurs. Now, I think we have to bear in mind that there was no church as we know it for Jesus to be concerned with at this point. There was the temple and the synagogue. I would also note that this parable was spoken in very close proximity to the one I cam currently studying. We must understand that the setting has its place in discerning the point. To my mind, He is still addressing His disciples on the matter of preaching. It comes back to that matter of not trying to figure out who should hear and who should not. Don’t think yourselves wise enough or just enough to decide who should be told of the good news. Tell them all, lest in chasing off those who will turn out to have been roadside dirt rather than good soil, you chase off those of good soil as well. Paul, on the other hand is addressing an established congregation. One thing I note immediately is that he specifically declares that those outside are God’s responsibility. Until and unless He sovereignly opts to change them to those inside, they remain His responsibility. In that regard, every single person that Jesus speaks of in this second parable is a member of ‘those outside’. With that, the apparent conflict is removed.
However, that just leads us to the second question. If they are not our concern, how do we arrive at an understanding of missions? Where is the ‘go therefore and make disciples among all nations’ in that? Oh, but the parable of the sower should already point to our answer! We are to go and to preach. We sow the word. What grows from our sowing is neither our concern nor really ours to control anyway. We can only do our best. In the end, the fruit that comes of our efforts is only marginally the result of our efforts. It’s more a matter of how the Judge of the whole earth determines to water and nurture that particular seed. The farmer sows, Jesus would say elsewhere, but when or if the harvest will come he cannot say with any great precision.
Returning momentarily to Paul’s point, he is addressing issues of church discipline. Whereas Jesus in the tares and the wheat is addressing a case where it may not be possible to tell which is which, Paul addresses the case of clear and blatant unrighteousness amongst those who profess to believe. This is more than just the slip of occasional sin. This is the continued devotion to sin under a thin veneer of churchiness. “Don’t tolerate it!”, he says. Remove it from your midst. Judge your own house and get it straight. Those outside are not your problem. It’s those inside. It’s that whole issue of motes and beams! They have allowed the mote of unrighteous behavior amongst the unsaved to blind them to the unrighteous behavior in their own midst, and in so doing they are making a mockery of God’s Good Name.
Now, I mentioned that there was a certain confluence of verses that really caught my attention, not just this one passage. There we have Paul reminding us that those outside are God’s task. Connect this with another word from Paul: “Be wise in dealing with outsiders,” he tells the Colossians (Col 4:5). He doesn’t say ‘be crafty’ or ‘be cautious’. He says, “Be wise. Make the most of every opportunity.” Then, add this point made to the Thessalonians: “So that you will behave rightly towards them” (1Th 4:12). OK. Hear the whole message. God will judge those outside, so be wise in dealing with them. Make the most of every opportunity you are given to tell them about this merciful Judge and the Gospel of redemption so that you will behave rightly towards them. The sower sows the word. The Provider of the seed and of the rain and of the sunlight will determine what grows, but for you the sower, it is enough that you sow. Sow freely, withholding opportunity from no man. Let none strike you as beyond redemption. That is not yours to judge. You have enough trouble judging your own house and even your own heart. Leave the response to God, you just provide something to respond to.
The farmer, by casting his seed as wantonly as we see him doing in this parable, is taking advantage of every opportunity. Perhaps in the very midst of that roadside dirt there’s a patch of good soil. If he will not cast far and wide, that soil will have no seed to give growth to. Perhaps there’s a fissure in the rock below that thin soiled area that will allow one or two seeds to take root. Perhaps another will come and remove the thorn bushes and allow the good seed to grow in good soil. We just don’t know what will happen when we sow. We can be pretty clear on what happens when we don’t. Sow freely.
