<p>13:3&nbsp;<em>And he spoke many things to them in parables, saying</em>- The Lord in chapter 12 seems to have concluded that the contemporary generation was wicked and bound for condemnation; they had rejected John&rsquo;s message after having initially responded to it, and had rejected Him. This is now the first time that we read in Matthew of the use of &ldquo;parables&rdquo;, and it seems to be in direct context with what He has said to Israelite society at the end of chapter 12. He is now speaking to them in this form so that they will be confirmed in their disbelief. The Kingdom principles which He had so clearly expressed in the Sermon on the Mount now become &ldquo;mysteries&rdquo; of the Kingdom (:11); instead of the Kingdom which could then have been established had Israel accepted Jesus as Messiah, the Kingdom principles would work quietly from within until such time as the Kingdom were to be politically established at a far future date. No longer do we read of the Kingdom coming &lsquo;near&rsquo; and being &lsquo;heralded&rsquo;. And the themes of most of His subsequent parables in Matthew include Israel&rsquo;s rejection of the Gospel. He spoke&nbsp;<em>things</em>&nbsp;to them, but in parables. This of itself suggests that He used parables so that people would&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;understand, as is made explicit in :11,12. His parables were not, therefore, simple stories with an obvious meaning. They may appear that way to us who have some understanding of their interpretation, but that was clearly not how they were understood by most of the initial audience. Even if they thought they understood them, it's made clear in :11 and :12 that they didn't. The change in style is due to His conclusion that that generation were condemned and had refused John's ministry and therefore Christ's message. From now onwards He would not be giving them any more- He was cloaking the message in parables, and explaining them only to the minority who had properly responded.</p>
<p>The chiasmic structure of Matthew 13 has been observed by several expositors, and it makes the sowing of the weeds by &ldquo;the enemy&rdquo; the central point of the entire presentation; the point is, that Israel initial response to the Gospel preached by John had been destroyed by a conscious program to stop the message being accepted, operated by the Jewish enemy / satan:<br />
Sower and the Soils (vv. 1-9)&nbsp;<br />
Question by Disciples/Answer by Jesus (Understanding) (vv. 10-17)&nbsp;<br />
Interpretation of the Sower and the Soils (vv. 18&mdash;23)&nbsp;<br />
Tares (vv. 24&mdash;30)&nbsp;<br />
Mustard Seed (vv. 31&mdash;32)&nbsp;<br />
Leavening Process (v. 33)&nbsp;<br />
Fulfilment of Prophecy (vv. 34&mdash;35)&nbsp;<br />
Interpretation of the Tares (vv. 36&mdash;43)&nbsp;<br />
Hidden Treasure (v. 44)&nbsp;<br />
Pearl Merchant (vv. 45&mdash;46)&nbsp;<br />
Dragnet (vv. 47&mdash;48)&nbsp;<br />
Interpretation of the Dragnet (vv. 49&mdash;50)&nbsp;<br />
Question by Jesus/Answer by the Disciples (Understanding) (v. 51)&nbsp;<br />
Householder (v. 52)</p>
<p><em>Listen, the sower went out to sow</em>- The Lord&rsquo;s teaching in 12:43 that the Jews had not responded to John the Baptist lays the basis for the parable of the sower, which was told the same day (13:1)- the seed initially experienced some growth, but then the 'evil one', the Jewish system, stunted that growth. Who is the sower? The preacher, or the Lord Jesus? Some Greek texts read &ldquo;<em>a&nbsp;</em>sower&rdquo; (followed by the AV), others &ldquo;<em>the</em>&nbsp;sower&rdquo; (cp. the Diaglott). Perhaps the Lord said both: &lsquo;A sower, the sower, went out...&rsquo;. Surely the sower is the Lord Jesus, but in&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;work of witness we are&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;witnesses. For we represent Him to the world. This is why &ldquo;the Spirit (the Lord the Spirit, Jesus) and the bride (the ecclesia) say, Come&rdquo;; ours is a united witness with Him.</p>
<p>&quot;Went out&quot; is the same Greek word has just been used in :1 to describe how Jesus had 'gone forth' out of the house to preach by the lakeshore. Although multitudes were there listening, the Lord knew that only a few would be good ground for the word. The word is several times used of the Lord 'going forth' to teach, and four times He uses it about His 'going forth' to hire workers for His harvest (Mt. 20:1,3,5,6). The 'sowing' of the word was therefore not merely a placing of ideas and theology in the minds of men, but in practice it was (and is) a call to go out and work, to harvest others for the Kingdom. The Lord 'came forth' in order to preach (Mk. 1:38 s.w. &quot;... that I may preach there... for&nbsp;<em>therefore came I forth</em>&quot;). Note that He didn't 'come forth' from Heaven as a pre-existent person; rather Matthew begins his Gospel by using the word about how the Lord 'came forth' from Bethlehem, His birthplace (Mt. 2:6). John's Gospel records the Lord as saying that He 'came forth' from God (Jn. 16:28 etc.), but this was in a spiritual sense; this is John's spiritual equivalent of Matthew's statement that He came forth from Bethlehem.</p>
<p>The condemned man in the parable of Mt. 25:24-26 complained that the Lord expected to reap where He had not sown. But the parable of the sower makes it clear that the Lord sows, even fanatically, everywhere. We perhaps would've reminded the man of the Lord's parable and His unceasing work of sowing, and reasoned 'That's not true!'. But this isn't the Lord's style. He takes people where they are and uses their own words and reasonings as if they are true- and shows by an altogether higher level of reasoning that they are not true. This explains His approach to the issue of demons. Matthew doesn't record that the Lord made a big issue about the seed- Luke's account records this: &quot;A sower went out to sow his seed; and as he sowed...&quot; (Lk. 8:5). This appears to state the obvious- a sower sows seed. But &quot;his seed&quot; can also mean 'the seed of Him'. There is an obvious connection with the great Messianic promises to the Jewish fathers about their &quot;seed&quot;. The seed is God's word, but it is also effectively 'Jesus'. For He personally is the essence of the Gospel message. This parable of the types of ground is explaining to the disciples why the majority of Israel were failing to accept Him, and thus had rejected the ministry and message of John.</p>