The Parable of the Sower
Many of the stories Jesus tells in the gospels are parables; that is, allegories, or stories illustrating an underlying moral or religious principle. After telling the parable to the people, he commonly explains the underlying meaning to his disciples. He often claims that the hidden meaning is not meant for regular people, but is reserved specifically for the disciples. A cynical view of this would be that these explanations, along with the description of the underlying meaning, were not spoken by the historical Jesus, but added later by the authors of the gospels to provide authority to the apostles and their successors.
Why does Jesus speak in parables? Why is He shown to share the hidden meaning only with the disciples? Aren’t there possibly some other people listening who are worthy and wise enough to understand the underlying message? I’d like to delve into this a bit, looking specifically at my favorite parable: the Parable of the Sower. This story is found in all three synoptic gospels, more or less following along equivalent text. Matthew does add a bit more in the section where Jesus is explaining why the hidden meaning is reserved for the disciples, so we’ll use Matthew as our template. Specifically, the story told in Matthew 13:3-33, taken from the David Bentley Hart translation. First, Jesus shares the parable itself with the crowd:
And he told them many things in parables, saying, “Look: A sower went out to sow. And, as he was sowing seeds, some of course fell beside the path and birds came and devoured them. Others, however, fell upon stony places where there was not much soil, and it sprang up instantly because there was no depth to the soil; But when the sun had risen it was parched, and because it had no root it withered away. But still others fell upon the thorns, and the thorns grew up and throttled them. But still others fell upon the good soil and yielded fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Let him who has ears listen.”
This story is compelling in part because it is so relatable. Even those of us who are not farmers can identify with embarking on a task in the face of the possibility, or even the expectation, of partially unsuccessful results. And yet, the little tragedy of every seed that does not bear fruit weighs on us a little bit. Were they wasted? A good parable like this one causes us to ponder and reflect on the meaning, and the possibilities.
At this point, the Jesus speaks with the disciples away from the crowd, and the meta-narrative begins:
And the disciples, approaching him, said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” And in reply he said, “Because it has been granted to you to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of the heavens, but it has not been granted to them.”
Jesus is now explaining how the secret knowledge will only be shared with the disciples, and not the larger crowd. Of course, this imparts a certain level of authority to the disciples, so it is plausible that this was added in later by the author to boost their own authority. In this case, that would be the author of Mark, as these verses are present in Mark, and the authors of Matthew and Luke were using Mark as a source.
Fair enough, but two things are bugging me here. First, Jesus just said to the crowd, “Let him who has ears listen.” Doesn’t this indicate that any deeper meaning to the story is potentially available to them as well? The stated prerequisite for understanding is having ears, which certainly must be a little allegory in itself, since nearly all of us have ears.
The second thing that bugs me is that the interpretation – the moral, the hidden meaning – of the parable, will appear momentarily in the gospel text. Wouldn’t that make this secret teaching available to those for whom – to paraphrase – knowledge of the mysteries of the Kingdom of the heavens has not been granted? Why would Jesus have secret teachings, and elsewhere say, “for there is nothing that has been veiled that will not be unveiled, and nothing hidden that will not be made known.” This passage from Matthew 10:26 has parallels in Mark, Luke, and the Gospel of Thomas, so it is more likely to reflect the actual words of the historical Jesus. Perhaps the writing down and dissemination of the synoptic gospels is the unveiling of this secret teaching?
Jesus continues in Matthew 13:12:
“For to him who has it shall be given and shall be more than is needed; but from him who does not have even what he has shall be taken away.”
This intriguing saying has parallels in Mark and Luke in a slightly different context. It is moved below the interpretation of the Parable of the Sower, with some intervening words, including the bit about not putting a lamp under a bushel after lighting it. More precisely, the author of Matthew has moved the “to him who has it shall be given” part up, above the interpretation of the parable. They have also moved the part about the lamp under the bushel up a few chapters.
Getting back to the meta-narrative, all three synoptic Gospels have Jesus proceed with this verse:
“Hence I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they neither hear nor understand.”
Jesus continues to boost the authority of the disciples, not only by not sharing the secret meaning of the story with the crowd, but by declaring that the crowd would not understand it anyway. This is a little puzzling to me. If they wouldn’t understand it, what difference does it make if you share the secret meaning with them? For that matter, why share the story with the crowd at all?
At this point, Mark has Jesus loosely quoting from the book of Isaiah without attribution. Matthew provides the attribution, and expands the quote. This little bit ties Jesus’s action in with the prophecies of the Old Testament, which is a common enough technique used to boost the authority of Jesus’s status, at least among the Jews. Jesus continues in the book of Matthew:
“And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, when he says, ‘With your hearing you will hear and in no way understand, and in seeing you will see and in no way perceive. For this people’s heart has grown crass, and they have listened with their ears grudgingly, and they have closed their eyes, so that it may never happen that they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with the heart and turn back, and I shall heal them.’”
The author of Matthew has Jesus quoting from Isaiah 8:9-10. Yahweh is speaking to Isaiah, and commanding him to go to the people of Israel and say these words. This kind of vindictive behavior is typical for the god of the Old Testament: Because the people listen grudgingly and close their ears, they shall not see and not hear, and not have a chance to be healed. (In the Markian version, Jesus uses the term “forgiven” in place of “healed”.)
At this point, Mark and Luke are done with the meta-narrative, and ready to get on to Jesus’s interpretation. Matthew, however, is not quite done:
“But blissful are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For, amen, I tell you that many prophets and upright men yearned to see the things you see, and did not see, and to hear the things you hear, and did not hear.”
Here, the author of Matthew seems to want to elevate Jesus’s disciples above the prophets of the Old Testament. By this point, I think everyone is ready to get on to the explanation of the parable:
“Listen, therefore, to the parable of the sower. When anyone hears the word of the Kingdom and does not understand, the wicked one comes and seizes away what has been sown in his heart; this is what is sown beside the path. And the word sown on the stony places: this is the one who hears the word and immediately accepts it with joy; But he does not hold the root within himself and it is temporary, and when tribulation and persecution come on account of the word he immediately falters. But what is sown among the thorns: this is the one who hears the word, and the anxiety of this life and the beguilement of riches throttle the word and it becomes fruitless. But the word sown upon the good soil: this is the one who, hearing and understanding the word, bears fruit, one a hundredfold, another sixtyfold, another thirtyfold.”
Is it just me, or is this just a huge anti-climax? The secret meaning only made available to the disciples is the simplest allegory imaginable. Why does this even need explaining? It would seem to me that at least the majority of the people in the crowd could figure out this simple meaning of the story all on their own. Am I misjudging the sophistication of the minds of first-century peoples? Am I overestimating the human mind in general? Did the author of this story really think that they were imparting some special authority to the disciples with this secret knowledge?
There has to be a deeper meaning to this parable than that supplied by the synoptic gospels. Let’s take a closer look and see what we find. It’s reasonable to think that the sower represents God in some form or another. Exactly which version the sower represents is up for debate. Perhaps it is Yahweh, or the Father. Perhaps it is the Godhead itself. In any event, this God clearly has an intention: They are sowing seeds with the desire that the crop bears fruit. If this were in the Old Testament, we might take the seeds to be people, say the people of Israel, and bearing fruit a hundredfold to mean that they will have many children and descendants. But this is not the intended meaning here, as these fruit are meant to be harvested, and not to produce future generations by their natural course.
The development of the seed into a plant represents the spiritual development of a human being. Even when the plant dies, withered by the sun or crowded out by thorns, the human being has not died. They simply have not managed to reach the goal of their spiritual development. Some humans don’t ever begin their spiritual journey, like a seed that is eaten by a bird before it can even sprout. Those that fully develop spiritually give back to the sower by providing food, and by providing the seeds for the future growing cycles. This analogy presents us with a God that is nourished by the spiritual fruition of human beings.
While this story helps us reflect on the nature of human spiritual development, it also helps us reflect on the nature of God. As we have mentioned, this God is intentional. They have a goal – producing fruit – and They set out to achieve that goal. What is most interesting here is that They aren’t particularly concerned with the outcome of each individual seed. If some humans don’t reach their full spiritual potential, that’s okay. The God still gets to harvest a crop. In fact, the sower seems almost a little foolish. Why are they throwing seeds among the thorns, and on the path? An experienced farmer would at least take some effort to throw seeds upon the good soil. Yet even an experienced farmer is not going to worry too much if some seeds fall among the rocks and thorns. Investing energy to assure that every seed grows into a plant and bears fruit probably wouldn’t work. It would also decrease the yield, because the effort invested into each individual seed would be so great.
Still, we are left asking, is the sower being careless when he throws seeds among the thorns? Or is it that they are more or less aiming to throw seeds on good soil, and even so, some of them fall in the thorns, and among the rocks, and on the path? In the former case, we have a God that almost seems indifferent to human affairs. This would be like the Godhead, or the Dao. In the latter case, while they care about human affairs to a certain degree, things are still from a fundamentally different perspective than our own. The loss of a few human souls is not a tragedy. It’s simply part of the process. This would be like God the Father. In both cases, they are still intentional: They are still sowing seeds with the desired outcome of people coming to spiritual fruition.
Jesus seems to be providing an answer to an age-old question here: Why do bad things happen to good people? To understand why, you need to acknowledge that God’s perspective on human affairs is very different from the human perspective. Things that seem like great tragedies to us, God is largely indifferent to. But this does not mean that God does not have a plan, or that our lives, or the universe, has no purpose. As we become closer to God, we can better understand His methods and His purpose. But this does not mean that we become more indifferent to the affairs of humans! We have to remember that our relationship with God is bidirectional. We learn from Him and He learns from us. So when we become closer to God, we not only improve ourselves and the people around us, but we improve God Himself. Perhaps this is why the God of the New Testament is so much more kind and loving than the God of the Old Testament. Perhaps the mission of Christ was not only to teach us how to become more holy, but to also teach God how to become more compassionate and understanding.