Where do Christians fit within the Parable of the Sower?

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
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 completely out of proportion. 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.

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 <https://biblehub.com/nasb77/matthew/13.htm>

1 Like
2

which church had he retired from?

1 Like
3

3And he was speaking much with them in parables and he said, “Behold, a sower went out to sow. 4But as he sowed, some seed fell on the side of the road and a bird came and ate it. 5And others fell on the rock where there was not much soil, and within the hour it sprouted because there was no depth of soil. 6But when the sun rose, it became hot, and because there were no roots, it dried up. 7And others fell among the thorns and the thorns came up and choked it. 8And others fell in the good soil and it yielded fruit, some a hundredfold and some sixty fold and some thirty fold. 9Whoever has an ear that hears, let him hear.”

I don’t see any reason why he should not be talking about how Christians, like anyone else, receive the message he was spreading, or wisdom in general.

1 Like
4

Can you elaborate on this? Not sure what this has to do with the points being made in the OP.

1 Like
5

How is your question relevant to the points being made in the OP? The reference to the retired pastor is largely incidental.

1 Like
6

None of this conflicts with Paul, but here ya go:

I discussed the first link with Copilot. Let me know if you’re interested in their take. The discussion is public already and you can join it if you like. We went into The Republic (Plato). Y’know… Paul spoke in Athens. Of course you do.

1 Like
7

Christians in general? Certain specific Christians?

1 Like
8

I encountered the same here in Germany and said to the Pastor, “You tell me that his cross was the reason he came, but his teaching and his healing were the reason for his popularity. He never made it explicitly clear that he wanted to die, otherwise the disciples would not have folowed him. It took a betrayal to initiate that storyline.”

For me, the Epistles of Paul served as an explanation of why the unexpected happened and what to make of it. The argument was made that the Gospels followed the Epistles and therefore were implicit, but when I read Mark, I read a tragedy with the transfiguration as the highest point in the story and from then on a downward journey to death. This is worked on and “improved” by Matthew and Luke so that the resurrection becomes the climax (John’s Gospel arises out of a favourable comparison of Jesus with Dionysus), but clearly there is a distinction between what Jesus says and what Paul says.

What Paul does is turn the tragic prophet into a symbol forshadowed by the brazen serpent. He uses whatever symbolism he can to suggest that no longer would the Messiah make Israel Lords over the Goyim, but the nations of the world would come to the God of Israel, making Israel rethink their covenant. Thereby, Jesus becomes the Cosmic Christ (unwittingly, from my view) and finally the Son of God.

In my eyes, the tragic prophet is the catalyst that shows the world how redemption is only found in love and unity. However, the church chose power in order to spread the message. Rather than fulfilling the calling of Israel to be a light to the world and the salt of the earth, the cross became a symbol of vicarious death to save the world, and either you accepted that or you suffered eternally.

1 Like
9

@Ichthus77

None of that pertains to the points made in the OP. If you want to discuss those points, feel free to chime in.

2 Likes
10

@greenfuse

By and large, Christians in general. Over the years I have come across only a couple of individuals who identified as Christians, but had effectively embraced the gospel preached by Jesus and dispensed with the teachings of those other than Jesus. Are they “Christian” as the word is commonly used? Doesn’t seem to fit.

1 Like
11

@Bob

Given things you have written elsewhere, why do you buy into the narrative of the “tragic prophet” whatsoever? According to the gospel preached by Jesus, “resurrection” pertains to the transformation of an unrighteous individual to a righteous individual. It was purely figurative. Seems like we agree there. Paul turned it into the literal bodily “resurrection” of Jesus which the writers of the four gospels spun into the narrative of Jesus as the “atoning sacrifice” - of which the “tragic prophet” is part and parcel - and wrapped it around the gospel preached by Jesus. Why not dispense with it altogether? Including the “transfiguration”.

1 Like
12

Well, they would seem to fall into each of the categories in the parable, in my experience. I say seem. People who call themselves Christian. Not being Christian I don’t feel in a position to say what constitutes a Christian, I’m not sure from what authority I could demonstrate an answer.

1 Like
13

@greenfuse

Make another pass of the OP. A key point is that they do not even understand/hear the word of the kingdom. As such, they will never “bear fruit” according to the parable.

1 Like
14

I’ll have to sit this one out. Usually, when a christian comes to a forum and goes, “Hey, x interpreted the text/sermon wrong. Here’s the right way to interpret it,” he’s about to offer an interpretation that someone will one day say about “hey, x interpreted the text/sermon wrong. Here’s the right way to interpret it.”

This is merely a single epistemological problem with this religious text and hardly the only reason to discard it. There’s a whole basket of ontological, metaphysical, and ethical problems, giving reason to discard it.

Man, it’s so crazy that even today, people are still interested in this ancient superstitious nonsense. I guess it’s what happens when the working classes are simply drained, sedated, with no real sense of direction or purpose. Even the atheists are like ho hum.

Hey can we talk about some scenes from the epic of gilgamesh instead? I like the band so….

1 Like
15

Yes, I got that. The ones you met, the small sample, fit for you the first group of seeds. I’m not in a position to assume that my interpretation of Christianity is the right one, given I am not Christian. But it seems to me there is a spread. I suppose also that if a Christian things the story is still useful, there’s a spread. Jesus could have written a simpler parable, with less possibilities.

16

So if an intelligent god would not defer us to any religious text as evidence for its existence, how then would we know it exists and what about it can we know. Well, we know what it isn’t; one of the monotheistic gods believed to exist today. That much is clear. But we can know something about it by reflecting on what we are. Creative, egoistic, capable of wrath and compassion, etc. Knowledge of god’s characteristics comes directly from the antropic disclosure of our own natures. Each religion is like a story about a certain set of projected human qualities in circumstances throughout history. Judaism… when god was insane, vengeful, sadistic. Christianity… when god was weak, pitiful, meager, a masochist. Islam… when god was a sexy warrior-paradise party beast. None of these gods exist, but they do exist kinda because the people are the expression of some aspect of God’s nature.

17

@greenfuse

Based on your response, it’s evident that there is something you are failing to understand. All that’s required is the ability to reason soundly. If you think that the parable isn’t simple, then you’re out of your depth. But if you are convinced that you understand the OP even though you are admittedly ignorant about the subject, then I don’t know what to tell you.

BTW, you don’t need to be a Christianity to understand Christianity.

18

@promethean75

What’s that old maxim about “better to remain silent…”? Didn’t you say that you were going to sit this one out…?

19

It is the way I can accept a historical Jesus. I also find the story told in the Gospel of Mark compelling, even if the transfiguration seems a little too dramatic. The point seems to be that he was called to bring the promise of the Tanakh to fruition, albeit in a different way than expected.

20

Is there a reason you went ad hom instead of interacting with what I wrote?

Presumably you mean be a Christian. Which Christianity? Catholicism, Gnostic Christianity, Pentacostalism, Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Baptism, Anglicanism etc. I’m glad for you that you think you can tell them all what category they all fit in and how they should interpret the Parable of the Sower. But you might find some disagreement out there. If you can only respond to disagreement with ad homs perhaps you’re less confident in your ideas than you realize. Oh, you’re right, I see it now. Ad homs are fun. Much better than reasoned discussion. Expect more.