The Parable of the Weeds in the Field (Mat. 13:24-30, 36-43)
24 He put before them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while everybody was asleep, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and then went away. 26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared as well. 27 And the slaves of the householder came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where, then, did these weeds come from?’ 28 He answered, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The slaves said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ 29 But he replied, ‘No; for in gathering the weeds you would uproot the wheat along with them. 30 Let both of them grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Collect the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’”
This second parable introduces us to the ambiguous character of the kingdom. It is also in this parable that it becomes clear that Jesus is not talking about some far-off heavenly kingdom of the future, but rather the church of today because this story of the enemy sowing weeds among the wheat makes no sense in a heavenly setting. The story closes with the judgment, also indicating it is not set in the future kingdom. On both counts, it is clear that when Jesus speaks of the kingdom he is talking about what the Epistle writers came to call the Body of Christ and what we know today as the Church. Jesus also offers an interpretation of this second parable, which can be found in verses 36-43:
36 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples approached him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.” 37 He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man; 38 the field is the world, and the good seed are the children of the kingdom; the weeds are the children of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. 40 Just as the weeds are collected and burned up with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, 42 and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!
Just as not everyone who makes a profession of faith does what is required to ultimately become a part of the kingdom (the parable of the sower), so not everyone who appears to be a part of the kingdom is truly a child of God (the parable of the weeds in the field). But it’s not easy to tell the difference. The servants are not to pull the weeds until the harvest, when the wheat and the weeds will be separated, and the weeds burned.
There is a great deal of uncertainty expressed in these first two parables. Not everything is as it seems in the kingdom. There are those who are, for all practical purposes, part of the kingdom, because the good seed has been planted, but they will fall away. Conversely, there are those who only appear to be part of the kingdom, who are actually children of the enemy. It is also implied in this second parable that there are true children of the kingdom who appear to be weeds, who evidently aren’t initially growing and bearing fruit as we might expect. We are strictly warned not to dismiss them, because we cannot tell. God will separate them at the end.
This does not mean that we have reason to fear. It rather calls for vigilance. But given a Protestant context, the issue of fear needs to be addressed. Reformed theology in particular emphasizes eternal security and supreme confidence in God to save us. This is not necessarily wrong, but it easily creates a bogeyman out of human vigilance. Humans are changeable but God is unchanging, says the argument. If we had to rely on our own faithfulness, we would be constantly worried about whether we were going to heaven or not. Having no security in our eternal state breeds uncertainty, which results in a needy and fearful relationship rather than one built on love and gratitude.
There are indeed Christians like this, and they do not practice a healthy relationship to God. But that being said, the whole Protestant argument stated above begins in that exact place. It begins with and grows out of a context of fear and uncertainty, particularly fear and uncertainty of (and, in a sense, rejection of) God’s good creation. That context is unscriptural and such an unscriptural starting point will lead inevitably to a false conclusion. But of deeper concern, it will also possibly lead us to miss the kingdom. Trust in an absolutist God will cause us to look for the sort of kingdom an absolutist God would run. According to these two parables, that’s not the kingdom of heaven with all it’s uncertainties. Trust in an absolute God will likely lead us astray into a kingdom which seems very God-like (from our human perceptions), but in truth is not the true kingdom to which Jesus is calling us, with all its ambiguity and uncertainty . . . but with the real God truly present and calling us to cooperate with him. But that’s the subject of the next two parables.
Copyright © 2006 James E. Nelson (Just Another Jim). All Rights Reserved.
You are free to distribute as long as attribution and web address is included.
Site support by C T E K