The Sower Went Out To Sow (Gospel, doctrine, church, Revelation)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
5 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it.
6 And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture.
7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it.
8 And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.
14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.
15 But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.
Having been raised strict Catholic, I am quite familiar with this passage and the way which we are supposed to understand it.
But my question is this: Do you suppose that Jesus is so shallow that there is only one possible interpretation? Do you ever wonder if Jesus might have had complex enough understanding, that He offered clues to something else? That he may have layered additional truths, additional understandings within His parables
I have a particular thought on this, but before I express it I would like to hear from others regarding my basic premise: that God is complex enough that He might weave multiple layers of understanding within his message. There are several here with whom I have had firm disagreements on a number of things. You know who you are. And it is you from whom I am most interested in hearing.
There may be different levels of meaning in any literature and parables are certainly open to this, but we need to beware of getting to fanciful about details of the story.
Having been raised strict Catholic, I am quite familiar with this passage and the way which we are supposed to understand it.
It would seem to me that the way we are to understand it is the way that Jesus himself explained it. The disciples asked Jesus what it meant (verse 9), and he told them.
Quote:
But my question is this: Do you suppose that Jesus is so shallow that there is only one possible interpretation?
Do you think Jesus is so shallow that he lied to his disciples when they asked him to explain his parable?
Do you think Jesus is so shallow that he lied to his disciples when they asked him to explain his parable?
Interesting question, but isn't "lie" a pretty strong term?
I mean, when you explain to a three year old the way the world works, are you lying? Or are you considering that a three year old may not be ready for the truth of how the world works?
There is a school of thought among Christians, held by almost of of them, that God no longer makes revelation because all has been revealed and that all that has been revealed is contained within the Bible, and therefore nothing more needs be revealed. A very small minority, maybe even a minority of one, believes that God talks to each of us all the time, and the only question is, do we listen?
So, my honest question is, do you suppose it is possible that God, through Jesus, continues to make revelation, to guide us from wrong into right? Otherwise, how would you explain how the medieval European Christian Church was so wrong, so evil, and yet we were able to move out of it (through the Reformation) and into our modern age (through the Enlightenment and beyond) into our modern era, which offers great bounty to more people than ever?
My more subtle question shall remain unasked until I have had more feedback from you good folks, especially from those of you who disagree with what I have said so far.
Joseph Angus, D.D., said
“When [an] allegory is written in the style of history, and is confined to occurrences
that may have taken place, it is called a Parable. When the allegory contains
statements of occurrences, which, from their very nature could not have happened, it
is called a Fable. (Judges ix. 6-21: 2 Kings xiv. 9: 2 Chron. xxv. 18.) When the
resemblances on which an allegory is founded are remote and abstruse, it is called a
Riddle. Nothing, however, need be said of Scripture riddles, as their hidden meaning
is always explained. (Judges xiv. 14: Prov. xxx. 15-21.)â€
Jesus' parables were earthly pictures depicting spiritual matters painted with words familiar to the people. It would seem contrary to the intended purpose to hide within layers deeper meanings. In fact, Principle Five of Horne's 9 Rules..... states, Ambiguity May Be Present But Jesus Intended One Sense. “The most comprehensive rule of interpretation yet remains. Compare Scripture with Scripture; “things spiritual with spiritual,†1 Cor. ii. 13. It is by the observance of this rule alone that we become sure of the true meaning of particular passages. And, above all, it is by this rule alone that we ascertain the doctrines of Scripture on questions of faith and practice.â€
Following this same line is Cooper's golden rule of interpretation, "When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense;therefore take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of its immediate context, studied in the light of its related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise."
There are no end to the problems and troubles plaguing Christendom today which have arisen over wrong interpretation of Scripture. Unfortunately, this problem will be continue for humankind seems intent to misinterpret God's Word. We must be diligent in our own study and research of Scripture to avoid being misled. Sooner or later we all will find ourselves in a church pew or listening to radio broadcast or watching a televangelist or reading a website or the latest Christian bestseller, when something we hear or read does not sound right. If we have no foundation in His Word, if we know not what Jesus' words said or meant, we can be led to believe all sorts of lies.
5 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it.
6 And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture.
7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it.
8 And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.
14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.
15 But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.
Having been raised strict Catholic, I am quite familiar with this passage and the way which we are supposed to understand it.
But my question is this: Do you suppose that Jesus is so shallow that there is only one possible interpretation? Do you ever wonder if Jesus might have had complex enough understanding, that He offered clues to something else? That he may have layered additional truths, additional understandings within His parables
I have a particular thought on this, but before I express it I would like to hear from others regarding my basic premise: that God is complex enough that He might weave multiple layers of understanding within his message. There are several here with whom I have had firm disagreements on a number of things. You know who you are. And it is you from whom I am most interested in hearing.
Thank you.
There would be only one or Jesus would not have given it to his disciples. He is not shallow, he is precise to a point and then expects us to find related scripture to bring greater light on it. It is there and clear.
Many can't or won't see it because it puts them in the position of examining not just what they believe but their teachers/church as well. Uncomfortable to say the least.
Then there are those who think having God's spirit means they get new revelation, not simply the ability to see scripture more clearly and in harmony with the base or visible meaning. They want to be the authority based on their revelations and it doesn't work that way.
Jesus is the greatest teacher and is not obscure or shallow. Many just don't want to see.
5 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it.
6 And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture.
7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it.
8 And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.
14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.
15 But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.
Having been raised strict Catholic, I am quite familiar with this passage and the way which we are supposed to understand it.
But my question is this: Do you suppose that Jesus is so shallow that there is only one possible interpretation? Do you ever wonder if Jesus might have had complex enough understanding, that He offered clues to something else? That he may have layered additional truths, additional understandings within His parables
I have a particular thought on this, but before I express it I would like to hear from others regarding my basic premise: that God is complex enough that He might weave multiple layers of understanding within his message. There are several here with whom I have had firm disagreements on a number of things. You know who you are. And it is you from whom I am most interested in hearing.
Thank you.
2 chuckmann,
addressing your OP. Israel being an Agriculture society, this parable could have been for his disciple also. since some of his disciples was fisherman, he used a fisherman scenario at other times, and in this case a farmer scenario. this is my opinion, before one can sow, one must first him, or herself be prepare for the labor of the land, meaning the (hearts, and the mind) of the people, for if the sower is not ready the sowing is in vain. for the receiving of the seed
, (word), is Labor, the preparing of the Land, hearts and minds, is necessary that’s why the raven, (the evil one took it away). for the word of God was not grounded, nor rooted in doctrine. second, one must remove any obstacles that may cause the stunt growth, (old wives tails, and unsound doctrine). like "OLD" dead trees, large rocks and bolder. because these thing can take away the nourishment of a full growth. third, a farmer know that he need to weed his crop, or else the weed will choke it out. (All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
but when the farmer prepare his ground, (the hears), then there will be a harvest. so good manager of the word of God is necessary. one know when, where, and how to plant the word of God. this is just an opinion.
Otherwise, how would you explain how the medieval European Christian Church was so wrong, so evil,
I would never say it was any such thing. The medieval Christian Church brought the gospel to the pagan Germans, Hungarians, and Slavs; it produced Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Duns Scotus, Francis and Clare of Assisi, and thousands more; it reduced the violence of the nobles, improved the lot of the serfs, and invented such things as hospitals and universities. I strongly suspect that you have never studied the history of the medieval church, and instead have a comic-book understanding of history, as shown by this:
Quote:
yet we were able to move out of it (through the Reformation)
Oh, yeah, the "Reformation", whereby Christian unity was smashed to bits, and every sort of error and heresy had its champion -- usually in the form of a secular lord who was happy to take advantage of the turmoil by confiscating and destroying church institutions purely for financial gain, and making himself the supreme religious authority in his domain. You think that was an improvement?
Quote:
and into our modern age (through the Enlightenment and beyond) into our modern era, which offers great bounty to more people than ever?
"Great bounty"? I see lots of people today with all kinds of toys and gadgets, but few with any sense of community, or interest in a life built on religious faith and a love of God and neighbor. There are more kinds of poverty than merely lacking money...
I would never say it was any such thing. The medieval Christian Church brought the gospel to the pagan Germans, Hungarians, and Slavs; it produced Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Duns Scotus, Francis and Clare of Assisi, and thousands more; it reduced the violence of the nobles, improved the lot of the serfs, and invented such things as hospitals and universities. I strongly suspect that you have never studied the history of the medieval church, and instead have a comic-book understanding of history, as shown by this:
Oh, yeah, the "Reformation", whereby Christian unity was smashed to bits, and every sort of error and heresy had its champion -- usually in the form of a secular lord who was happy to take advantage of the turmoil by confiscating and destroying church institutions purely for financial gain, and making himself the supreme religious authority in his domain. You think that was an improvement?
"Great bounty"? I see lots of people today with all kinds of toys and gadgets, but few with any sense of community, or interest in a life built on religious faith and a love of God and neighbor. There are more kinds of poverty than merely lacking money...
The evidence in medieval and earlier history supports the parable as we see the effect of the weeds on the totality of the actions taken by those claiming to be Christian. Even while wheat existed, the ultimate work of such was buried,
Catholic killed Catholic and then Catholic killed Protestant and .. Protestant killed Protestant and Protestant killed Catholic.
That is evidence that the RCC and it's offspring did not bring the real gospel to many,or such non Christian actions would never have occurred.
The weeds dominated. Jesus was right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
