Jesus'
Parable of Wheat & Tares
Matthew 13: 24-30, 36-43By Gary
DeLashmutt
Teaching t08782
watch | download | PowerPoint
IntroductionLast
week we began a series on Jesus' parables of the kingdom of God—which are
found in Matthew 13,25. I noted that the seven parables in Matthew 13
have a common theme—“the mysteries of the kingdom” (13:11a). That
is, they reveal a portion of God's kingdom that had not been revealed in the Old
Testament. This is why Jesus says 13:34-35 (read). Before we go on to the second
parable, let's briefly review some general observations about this important issue. The
Old Testament view of history was that we live in what one biblical author calls
“this present evil age”—an age dominated by rebellion and evil.
But God is sovereign over history, and one day he would replace this present evil
age with his own righteous and loving reign. The event that separates these two
periods of history is the coming of God's Messiah. Jesus affirms the Old
Testament view—but he adds some crucial additional information. What the
Old Testament prophets called the coming of Messiah is actually his Second Coming.
Prior to that time, Messiah would come—not as a reigning King but as suffering
Servant—to die for the guilt of a rebellious humanity who God loves. His
first coming would usher in an unanticipated form of God's kingdom that is different
in important ways from the kingdom in its fullness. This is what Jesus calls
“the mysteries of the kingdom” and describes through the seven parables
in Matthew 13. Through these parables, then, we learn about how God's
kingdom is at work in the world today (crucial for the purpose of the church).
We also learn about how we can individually benefit from and cooperate with his
activity. Review the answer to this question for the parable of the soils.
Now let's move on to the next parable—the parable of the wheat and tares. ExplanationRead
13:24-30. This is the story of the dirty trick. A farmer sowed his field with
wheat seeds. An enemy maliciously over-sowed the same field with tare seed. “Tares”
are probably “bearded darnel,” a weed which is similar to rye grass.
Since both wheat and tares are in the grass family, they look similar shortly
after germination. But as soon as the wheat begins to form grains, the difference
becomes very obvious. The fact that tares were not just occasionally present,
but numerous throughout the field, made it obvious that someone had sown them
because of malice toward the owner. The slaves wanted to pull the tares out because
they sap nutrients and are vulnerable to parasites. But the farmer wisely forbade
this. The solution was wait until harvest time and then separate them, storing
the wheat and burning the tares. But remember—this isn't just a story
about Palestinian agriculture (it is doubtful that something like this ever happened
because people don't collect bags of tare seed). It is an illustration of both
the mystery and final phases of God's kingdom (13:24a). Jesus gives us a partial
explanation of the parable's meaning in 13:36-43 (read). This parable contains
both old information and new revelation about the kingdom of God. OLD
INFORMATION: At his Second Coming, Jesus will separate those who belong to
him from those who don't. At that time, he will banish those who don't belong
to him to hell—and he will exalt those who belong to him. He even quotes
Daniel 12 in 13:43, which makes this same point (read Daniel 12:2b,3).
John the Baptist echoes this same language in Matthew 3:12.
NEW REVELATION: Re-read 13:30—“Allow both to grow together
until the harvest.” During the “mystery” phase of God's kingdom,
it is not his will for his people to be separated from his enemies. Rather, he
wants them to live side by side in a composite human society. OLD
INFORMATION: At his Second Coming, Jesus will utterly defeat Satan and his
work among humanity. This was known since Genesis 3:15 (read).
NEW REVELATION: During the “mystery” phase of God's kingdom,
human history during will witness both the development of Satan's plans for humanity
and God's plans—which will culminate in Christ's return (“the harvest”).
Jesus made this same point (in didactic form to his disciples) in Matthew 24:5-14. 24:6-9,12
describes the growth of Satan's work in human society—“birth pangs”
(increase in frequency and intensity) of WAR, “NATURAL” DISASTERS, RELIGIOUS
PERSECUTION, and GENERAL IDEOLOGICAL DECEPTION. Our history books document the
tragic fulfillment of this prediction. Anyone who knows history realizes that
this (and not the humanistic predictions) has been the tragic record of humanity
living independently from God. Jesus says these things will culminate in the emergence
of Satan's counterfeit messiah—Antichrist (24:15)—and a situation so
terrible that only Christ's personal return will rescue humanity from total annihilation
(24:21,22). This is the growth of the tares. But this doesn't mean that
Jesus has been absent or impotent over the last twenty centuries. Rather, even
as the enemy's plan develops, Jesus is sovereignly advancing this phase of his
kingdom—by orchestrating the spread of the gospel through his followers to
ethnic groups all over the world (read 24:14). Only when every ethnic group has
had the opportunity to hear this good news will Jesus return to end human history
as we know it by defeating his enemy and establishing his kingdom on earth. This
is the growth of the wheat. The last twenty centuries have witnessed the gradual
fulfillment of this plan. Summarize—so what? How
should this information affect your life? How should this affect the purpose of
the church? I want to focus on two specific, life-changing lessons we can learn
from this parable . . . Lesson
1: The Two HumanitiesRe-read 13:38. Does it bother you that Jesus distills
all of humanity into two groups? Does it offend you that he names these two groups
“the sons (descendants) of the kingdom” and “the sons (descendants)
of the evil one?” What a simplistic and bigoted description! Here is Jesus
the “binary bigot” who desperately needs diversity training! Before
I explain what this verse does mean, we need to understand what it doesn't mean.
In fairness to the Bible, it recognizes and affirms the richness of amoral
human diversity. God designed humans to be diverse in gender, ethnicity, cultural
tastes, talents and interests, etc.—and he wants us to enjoy and respect
this kind of diversity in ourselves and others. Jesus also makes it clear
that he wants the “sons of the kingdom” to treat the “sons of the
evil one” with love and respect (read Matthew 5:44-45). Jesus promotes authentic
religious tolerance (define). But, having made these important
qualifications, the Bible insists (from Genesis through Revelation) there are
ultimately only two groups of humans spiritually-speaking: those who are “children
of the evil one” because they follow him in his revolt against God, and those
who are “children of the kingdom.”
We are not automatically included in God's kingdom. We start out in Satan's
kingdom, and need to be transferred into Christ's kingdom (read Colossians 1:13-14). We
are not born into God's family. We are born alienated and orphaned from God, and
need to be adopted into God's family by receiving Christ (read John 1:12). So
the question is: To which humanity do you want to belong? Maybe you are uncomfortable
with this “either-or” question, but that's what God asks you. And he
asks you this—not because he is an uptight, politically incorrect bigot—but
because he is your loving heavenly Father who knows what is best for you and wants
you to have it. The cool thing is that it is very easy to become
a child of God's kingdom. All you have to do is personally receive Jesus as your
Savior, and God adopts you as his child—regardless of your previous heritage.
Have you made this decision? Lesson 2: The Church and Human
SocietyThis parable also has a super-important lesson for the church—a
lesson that it has often ignored over the past 20 centuries to its own shame.
That lesson concerns the relationship God intends between the church and the rest
of society. Yes, when Christ returns God himself will create
a religiously pure society by removing all who did not respond to his invitation.
But during this phase of his kingdom, this is not his will (re-read 13:30). He
wants what Leonard Verduin calls a “composite society”—Christians
living side-by-side with non-Christians in the same society, being in the world
but not of it (John 17:16-18), being salt and light (Matthew 5:13-16)—so
that people will be attracted to Christ by our love and message and decide to
change humanities. Stated differently, during this age God
is against all “Christian” attempts to create a religiously pure society.
With certain notable exceptions, the history of the church has largely been a
tragic failure to observe this lesson. Instead, the church has usually attempted
to dominate human society or (when domination is impossible) to isolate
themselves from human society. When the church has been in the majority
or had sufficient political resources, it has often sought to dominate human society
by legally imposing Christianity on everyone. This has resulted in the most shameful
legacy of the church, which has alienated millions of people from Jesus Christ.
This error began in the early 300's AD, after the Roman emperor Constantine
“converted” to Christianity and immediately affixed a symbol of Christ
to his soldier's shields as they went into battle. Almost overnight, Christianity
went from being a persecuted sect to the religion of the state that persecuted
other religions. It was in this context that Augustine twisted scripture to justify
compelling people to convert to Jesus—even to the point of physical force
and execution. The Middle Ages saw the popes claim that the state was the servant
of the church. This led to the formation of the Inquisition, which executed thousands
of Jews and other non-Christians. It also led to the Crusades, which made the
streets of Jerusalem run red with the blood of the Muslim “infidels.”
The Reformers recovered the biblical message of salvation by grace, but they stayed
with the domination strategy for the church. John Calvin authorized the execution
of Michael Servetus because he denied the Trinity. The Reformers drowned thousands
of Anabaptists (in part) because they rejected infant baptism. Oliver Cromwell
led his troops in worship services of thanksgiving to God for enabling them to
kill whole villages of Irish Catholics. Not until the American Revolution did
the legal separation of church and state begin to move the church of the West
away from this horrible error. This is why I get nervous and upset when
I hear advocates of the Religious Right claim that the Founding Fathers wanted
a “Christian nation.” Does this quote by James Madison sound sympathetic
to this notion: “During almost fifteen centuries the legal establishment
of Christianity has been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in
all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the
laity, in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”
I know this subject is complicated, but this is one answer we can do without!!
What we should want is what we have—religious freedom. As Francis Schaeffer
said, “ . . . as we stand for religious freedom today,
we need to realize that this must include a general religious freedom from the
control of the state for all religion. It will not mean just freedom for
those who are Christians. It is then up to Christians to show that Christianity
is the Truth . . . in the open marketplace of ideas.” When
the church is in the minority, or when its bid to dominate has failed, it has
tended to pursue the strategy of isolation. This is what is sometimes called the
self-imposed ghettoization of Christianity—angrily denouncing the
evils of our society and withdrawing from it to form our own cradle-to-grave Christian
sub-culture. The emphasis shifts from intentionally forming
friendships with our non-Christian neighbors and work associates and sharing Christ
in that context, to hiding in our holy huddles while we deplore the world's wickedness.
The emphasis shifts from intentionally finding ways to make the gospel
understandable and culturally relevant to non-Christians, to constructing meetings
and structures that are comfortable and familiar to us (Christian music genre
and labels; Christian school systems from pre-school through graduate school;
Christian TV stations; Christian entertainment industry:
theme parks, wrestling federation, etc.; Christian Yellow Pages; Christian-only
exercise programs; Christian-only retirement homes, etc.). When Americans
identify Ned Flanders as the prototypical evangelical Christian, we've got a ghetto
problem! When Christians think that Ned is a good example of what evangelical
Christians should be, we've got a worse problem! I
know that this issue is complicated. But in the end we have to decide which will
be our greatest priority—to make it as difficult as possible for us to sin,
or to make it as easy as possible for non-Christians to come to Christ. As for
this church, it will be the latter! I know that age-appropriate protection
is necessary in Christian parenting. But in the end we have to decide what our
highest goals for our children are—to protect them from sinful secular influences,
or to equip them to love and reach out to the lost people Jesus loves. As for
my family, it will be the latter! I guess this is the error
I worry about in Xenos more than the error of domination . . . Footnotes
Copyright
2001 Gary DeLashmutt
| 
