Mark 4:13-20: (29) The First Parable Interpreted

Narrator: Chris Genthree
Mark 4:13‑20  •  12 min. read  •  grade level: 10
Listen from:
4:13-20
21.-The First Parable Interpreted “And he saith unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how shall ye know1 all the parables? The sower soweth the word. And these are they by the way side,2 where the word is sown; and when they have heard,3 straightway4 cometh Satan, and taketh away the word which hath been5 sown in them. And these in like manner are they that are sown upon the rocky places, who, when they have heard6 the word, straightway7 receive it with joy; and they have no root in themselves, but endure for a while;8 then, when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of9 the word, straightway10 they stumble11. And others are they that are sown among the thorns; these are they that have heard12 the word, and the care of the world,13 and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful. And those are they that were sown14 upon the good ground; such as hear the word, and accept15 it, and bear fruit, thirtyfold, and sixtyfold, and a hundredford “16.
The apostles came to the Lord to seek enlightenment with regard to the meaning of the parable of the sower. He told them that the mysteries of the kingdom, though concealed from the unbelieving mass, were committed to them. But it was one thing for them to have these mysteries in a parabolic form, and another thing to know the true inwardness of the parables. The ignorance of the disciples upon the latter head stood confessed in their inquiry concerning the parable of the sower. This parable was, in comparison with others, elementary in nature, and introductory in character. If they were unable to comprehend the initial lesson regarding the hitherto unrevealed phases of the kingdom, how much less would they be able to understand further parables of a more advanced and more complex nature? The Lord said to them, “Know (οἴδατε) ye not this parable? how then will ye be acquainted with (γνώσεσθε)17 all the parables?”
This inability of even the apostles to understand the significance of the parables apart from the Lord's own exposition shows that they were not used as are figures of speech, in the ordinary acceptation of this term. They were not like similes or metaphors or allegories introduced in order to illuminate or embellish or simplify a discourse. The parables, on the contrary, however deeply they might be impressed upon the memory, presented the truth shrouded in a veil, which was impenetrable to the disciples and to the multitude alike. The Prophet lifted the veil for the instruction of His followers; as we read, “Without a parable spoke he not to them [the populace]; and in private he explained all things to his disciples” (Mark 4:3434But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples. (Mark 4:34), New Trans.), so that when He said to them, Have ye understood all these things? they were able to reply, Yea, Lord (Matt. 13:5151Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord. (Matthew 13:51)). What the disciples failed to retain of the parables and their interpretations unfolded to them during the term of their Master's ministry, the Holy Spirit (so the Lord promised), should bring to their remembrance after His descent at Pentecost (John 14:2626But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26)).
It is remarkable that but few of the Lord's own interpretations of His parables are recorded in the Gospels. Those of the sower and of the wheat and tares are given (Matt. 13:18-23; 37-43), as well as that relating to the true nature of defilement (Matt. 15:10-2010And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: 11Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. 12Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? 13But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. 14Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. 15Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable. 16And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? 17Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? 18But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. (Matthew 15:10‑20); Mark 7:14-2314And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand: 15There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man. 16If any man have ears to hear, let him hear. 17And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable. 18And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; 19Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats? 20And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. 21For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: 23All these evil things come from within, and defile the man. (Mark 7:14‑23)). It may also be said that we have the explanation of the parable of the drag-net (Matt. 13:47-5047Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: 48Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. 49So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, 50And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13:47‑50)). With regard to the others, however, we are left to seek to understand their meaning in the light of the subsequent revelations of the Spirit, transmitted through the medium of the apostles in the Epistles.
THE SOWER AND THE SEED
It has been suggested that “the parable of the sower” is not altogether a suitable title for the Lord's first parable, since there is no definite statement of the identity of the sower, while a lengthy explanation is given regarding the behavior of the seed in the various soils; and that a preferable description would be the parable of the seed and the soils. This remark must have been made without adequate reference and reflection. For the former is precisely the designation bestowed upon it by the Lord Himself. According to Matthew He prefaced His interpretation by the words, “Hear ye the parable of the sower.” And evidently the parable is so described by the Lord to indicate that it unfolded the relationship He Himself was assuming towards the kingdom of God in its altered character. He, so to speak, laid aside the sword of the King and Judge and took up the word of the Prophet and Teacher.
This new function, as about to be exercised, possessed also a special feature which the parable made clear. This feature was that the work of the Sower would, to outward seeming, be a partial failure. When Messiah reigns in power His rule will be successful, without exception, in subduing all things to Himself. When the Sower sowed the word, three-fourths would be absolute failure, and the remainder fruitful only in varying degrees.
The Sower therefore is the subject of this parable, and, in agreement with the second parable, it may be understood that “He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man” (Matt. 13:3737He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; (Matthew 13:37)). Subsequently, the apostles, in their ministry of the truth, became sowers themselves in a secondary sense. For example, Paul used this figure when writing to the Corinthians: “If we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?” (1 Cor. 9:1111If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? (1 Corinthians 9:11); cp. also 1 Cor. 3:66I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. (1 Corinthians 3:6)).
The Lord's declaration that He was among them as the Sower implied that His errand of seeking fruit in Jehovah's vineyard was futile, as it was definitely expressed in another of His parables (Luke 13:6-96He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. 7Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? 8And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: 9And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down. (Luke 13:6‑9)). It was not yet the glorious year of jubilee to which the ancient type pointed when there should be no need of sowing (Lev. 25:1111A jubilee shall that fiftieth year be unto you: ye shall not sow, neither reap that which groweth of itself in it, nor gather the grapes in it of thy vine undressed. (Leviticus 25:11)); nor was it that millennial day of extreme fruitfulness when, according to the prophecy, “the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed” (Amos 9:1313Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. (Amos 9:13)). But it was a day to “sow beside all waters” —a day when the Great Husbandman must, in fulfillment of the purposes of God, wait patiently for the precious fruit of the earth. It was, moreover, a day of shame and suffering for the Servant of Jehovah, when the Sower must sow in tears; yet, in the words of the Psalmist, “though he goeth on his way weeping, bearing forth the seed; he shall come again with joy, bringing his sheaves with him” (Psa. 126:66He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him. (Psalm 126:6), R.V.).18 For if He was the patient Sower, He was also the Lord of the harvest. Israel then, having been found barren and unfruitful, the Lord came bringing that which would produce fruit, and this good seed He scattered broadcast, upon good and bad soils alike. He had come to serve, and, as the Perfect Servant, He left the results of His work with Him who sent Him, according to the promise of Jehovah concerning His word of grace, “For as the rain cometh down and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, and giveth seed to the sower, and bread to the eater; so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth; it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” (Isa. 55:10, 1110For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. (Isaiah 55:10‑11)). In the strength of this assurance the Prophet of God sowed in the morn His seed, and in the evening withheld not His hand.
In Mark the seed is called the word simply, without any qualification; but in Luke we read more definitely, “The seed is the word of God.”
This phrase predicates the divine origin of the word. It is of God. “I have given unto them thy word,” the Son said to the Father. The word of God has the germ of life within itself.
It is living and operative. It is incorruptible and eternal. It possesses life, and it bestows life. In the Gospel by Luke where the kingdom of God is treated in its world-wide aspect, this designation is on this account the most appropriate. But in Matthew we have not the generic but the specific term. The seed is there described as the “word of the kingdom.” This phrase covered the subject of the word, while that of Luke looked to its Author. Christ's word had special and particular reference to the kingdom. We learn therefore from the First Gospel that in the parable of the sower the Lord made direct allusion to His own teaching on the topic of the kingdom. And it is well to remember that while the instruction in regard of the hindrances to the germination and fruitfulness of the seed is of general application to spiritual matters at all periods, primarily it referred to the gospel of the kingdom, preached by the Lord and His apostles.
On comparing the accounts in Matthew and in Luke, it will be further noted that the former emphasizes the necessity for understanding the word, and the latter the necessity of believing it. The hollowing extract refers to these differences in mode of expression between the two Evangelists.
“There is, of course, a great deal in common between the two; but the Spirit had a wise reason for using the different expressions. It would have been rather giving an opportunity to an enemy, unless there had been some good grounds for it. I repeat that it is ‘the word of the kingdom' in Matthew, and ‘of God' in Luke. In the latter we have ‘lest they should believe,' and in the former 'lest they should understand.'
“What is taught by the difference? It is manifest that, in Matthew, the Holy Ghost has the Jewish people particularly in His mind, although the word is going out to the Gentiles in due time; whereas, in Luke, the Lord had particularly the Gentiles before Him. They understood that there was a great kingdom, which God was about to establish, destined to swallow up all their kingdoms. The Jews being already familiar with the word of God, their great point was understanding what God taught. They had His word already, though superstition and self-righteousness never understood it (you might have been controverted had you said to a Jew, You do not believe what Isaiah says); and a serious question came, Do you understand it? But if you looked at the Gentiles — they had not the lively oracles, so that among them the question was believing what God said; and this is what we have in Luke. The point for a Gentile was that, instead of setting up his own wisdom, he should bow to what God said.
“Hence you will observe that, looking at people who had not the word of God, and who were to be tested by the gospel going out to them in due time, the question was believing something that had not been brought out to them before. In Matthew, speaking to a people who had the word already, the great thing was to understand it.
This they did not. The Lord intimates that, if they heard with their ears, they did not understand with their hearts. So that this difference, when connected with the different ideas and objects of the two Gospels is manifest, interesting, and instructive.
“When anyone heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not.” Another solemn truth we learn from this — the great thing that hinders spiritual understanding is religious prejudice.
The Jews were charged with not understanding. They were not idolaters, or open infidels, but had a system of religion in their minds in which they had been trained from infancy, and which darkened their intelligence of what the Lord was bringing out. So it is now. Among the heathen, though you would find an evil state morally, yet at least there would be that kind of barren waste where the word of God might be freely sown, and by grace, be believed. That is not the case where people have been nurtured in ordinances and superstition: there the difficulty is to understand the word.” 19[W. J. H.]
(To be continued)
 
1. “will ye be acquainted with,” J.N.D.; W.K.
2. “beside the way,” W.K.
3. “hear,” j.N.D.; W.K.
4. “immediately,” J.N.D.; W.K.
5. “was sown” W.K.
6. “hear” J.N.D.; W.K.
7. “immediately,” J.N.D.; W.K.
8. “but are for a time,” J.N.D.; “but are temporary,” W.K.
9. “on account of,” J.N.D.; W.K.
10. “immediately,” J.N.D.; W.K.
11. “are offended,” J.N.D.; “are stumbled,” W.K.
12. “hear,” W.K.
13. “cares of life,” J.N.D.; “of the age,” W.K,
14. “have been sown,” J.N.D.
15. “receive,” J.N.D.; W.K., but it is παραδέχομαι here, not λαμβάνω as in verse 16.
16. “one thirty, and one sixty, and one a hundred,” J.N.D.; W.K.) (iv. 13-20, R.V.)
17. Have ye not an inward conscious knowledge of this parable? How then will ye acquire objectively a knowledge of all the parables?” Compare the note on 1 Cor. 8:11Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. (1 Corinthians 8:1) in J. N. Darby's translation of the New Testament, 3rd Ed., 1884, where the distinction between the two Greek verbs is discussed.
18. This beautiful stanza is variously translated: “Surely (going) he goeth and weepeth, bearing a load of the seed; surely (coming) he shall come with joyful song, bearing his sheaves” (W. Kelly). “Il va en pleurant, portant la semence qu'il répand; il revient avec chant de joie, portant ses gerbes” {J.N. Darby's French version}. The latter is rendered in English thus: “He goeth forth and weepeth, bearing seed for scattering; he cometh again with rejoicing, bearing his sheaves.”
"
19. “Lectures on the Gospel of Matthew,” by W. Kelly, London, 1896, pp. 285-7.