Where do Christians fit within the Parable of the Sower?

Philosophy of Religion
1

For those unfamiliar with this particular parable, see below.

Some years ago, I had a series of discussions with a retired pastor regarding the gospel preached by Jesus. As part of those discussions, I noticed that he would often say something like, “That can’t be what Jesus means. Corinthians says this” or “Romans says this” or what have you. So I said to him, “You know, you read Jesus’ words through the lens of Paul”. He acknowledged that he did so. In doing so, he would distort the meaning of what Jesus was saying. Sometimes so much so so as to interpret it as meaning the opposite of what the words actually say. It effectively rendered him incapable of understanding what Jesus was saying. So I suggested that he read the words Jesus spoke from the beginning of His ministry through the crucifixion as if the rest of the NT did not exist. To allow the words spoken by Jesus to speak for themselves. He thought about it a bit and said, “I don’t think I can do that”.

Over the years I have had similar discussions with a number of Christians with similar results. So I would make the same suggestion that I had given to the pastor. Most seemed to have no interest at all. A few actually took up the challenge. None completed it.

As such they were all like those who hear " the word of the kingdom, and do not understand it". Even worse none of them even bothered to put the effort necessary to understand it.

In my experience, most Christians do not know even the half of what Jesus taught. So they not only don’t understand the word of the kingdom, they haven’t even bothered to hear it.

While this is a relatively small sample, I have no reason to think that it isn’t representative. If they understood it they would be true disciples of Jesus instead of Christians.

Matthew 13

18“Hear then the parable of the sower. 19“When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is the one on whom seed was sown beside the road. 20“And the one on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, this is the man who hears the word, and immediately receives it with joy; 21yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away. 22“And the one on whom seed was sown among the thorns, this is the man who hears the word, and the worry of the world, and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful. 23“And the one on whom seed was sown on the good soil, this is the man who hears the word and understands it; who indeed bears fruit, and brings forth, some a hundredfold, some sixty, and some thirty.”

from Matthew 13 NASB 1977

2

You have been interacting with Protestants, and you have concluded that all Christians are Protestants. In fact most are not, although Protestantism is popular in certain parts of the West. Protestants do interpret Christianity through a very particular, Reformation-reading of Paul. Other Christians do not.

3

The problem is that all that we have are the words that the New Testament authors attribute to Jesus. We have no way of filtering them in order to determine which ones he actually said.

4

Your ‘just Jesus and nothing more’ approach isn’t all that helpful.

When Jesus stopped talking, there were 12 disciples, various friends and relatives, and memories about what he said and did. Some people liked him; some people didn’t.

You come along 2000 years later and announce that only Jesus and nothing else counts. Perhaps, possibly, you are leaving far too much on “the cutting room floor”. Quite a few years passed before there was a rough draft of what Jesus said. Of necessity, the texts were selected or rejected and interpreted. We don’t have a "raw’ collection of Jesus’ words, and neither did the first editors of the NT.

Paul did a lot of talking and wrote letters. What he had to say (for better or worse) was more of a complete record. But more years passed before Jesus, Paul, et al showed up in the final draft of the NT. After that we have 20 centuries of interpretation, debate, fidelity, and heresy.

Nothing is stopping any believer from choosing which text he or she likes best, and of necessity he or she must interpret it well, badly, or indifferently. You are in the same boat.

5

Then I agree, he was not understanding the gospel.

All one needs to know is in the gospel alone. Even just the parable of the Prodigal son summarizes all human history, all revelation of God’s relationship with humankind, and all metaphysics one need consider. Or, love one another as I have loved you, love your enemies, and love God with your whole being - sums up all of the law (all ethics, all need for politics). Straight from the gospel.

Because of this, we might also say, all one needs to know is the whole Bible, because the entire Bible is about God in this world, God and humankind, or simply, Jesus with us and our lives in Jesus.

Or we can say, all one needs to know is what a saint (a proper resident in God’s Holy Church) does and says, because a saint carries with him or her the same Holy Spirit conveyed in the Bible or best, in the gospel.

Yes, that.

When we encounter something in the gospel that we do not understand without interpretation, when it isn’t speaking directly to us, we need to be careful, and consult prayer as much as we would consult a letter from Paul or some particular preacher. We need to each become preachers, whose words and interpretations may as well be provided by God as by our own understanding or that of someone else’s.