After the parable of the Sower (Matt 13:1-23) Jesus explains that the different plantings and describes how their outcomes refers to the different ways people accept or reject message of the Kingdom. This important parable goes a long way in explaining our experience of Soteriology.
So if Universalism is true why doesn’t Jesus alert us to the fact that all will be saved regardless of where they are planted while he tells or explains this important parable?
Hi Luke,
As I see it, the parable has nothing to do with Universalism one way or another, but about how and ‘why’ different people respond in different ways to the gospel. And I read the parable a bit differently than you. I see Jesus saying that the soil is the man, while you seem to be saying the seed is the man–but maybe you didn’t mean it to sound that way.
The most notable thing to me about this parable is that the soil has no choice in the matter. A farmer prepares his field to receive the seed, and the good soil produces a good crop. The path the farmer walks on is unable to take in the seed–this man is unable to understand the gospel, and the message is snatched away by the devil. The weedy and rocky areas outside the farmers field cannot help being what they are–the farmer hasn’t done anything with them yet. It’s his fault the weeds are allowed to grow and choke the seed, and it’s his fault the ground is hard and rocky so that the seed cannot develop it’s roots. Perhaps next year he’ll expand his field, pull the weeds, plow the path and remove the rocks. 
I tried unsuccessfully to start a new garden area this year. The ground on the spot is hard as rock (desert caliche) about 6 inches down, and the corn I tried to grow only got 1 or 2 feet tall. The leaves were dry and yellow even with adequate watering, and I’m sure it didn’t help that I let the weeds go and never hoed them down. But I don’t blame the ground. It can’t help being what it is and it wasn’t ready for corn. Next year I’ll add more compost, till it more thoroughly and plant alfalfa in hopes of improving the soil and breaking up the caliche. I’m not going to consign it to hell because it didn’t produce a crop that it wasn’t able to produce.
Sonia
Thanks for the gracious response SLJ.
I think your explanation introduces elements into the parable that are not present in the original story.
There are several alternatives, no growth (19), short-term growth (21), choked growth (22) and real growth (23). Once the “message” is cast out/planted (4) it seems the growth and the person become interchangeable “What was sown among the thorns is the man who hears the word” (22) Jesus doesn’t provide any other alternatives or add anything else to the parable, there is a sobering finality to this story and what happens to each of the categories of people.
I like your gardening comments, it makes me realize how important the metaphor of plant growth is in Scripture.
Luke,
Thanks so much for being here and presenting a challenge. I doubt that anybody wants to be self deceived (maybe some do to avoid pain?) and your presence here is very important, in my opinion.
Thanks,
R
I agree, roofus! I appreciate your participation here, Luke!
That may be so… but even in his explanation our Lord leaves us with things to ponder, and I pray we’ll be always growing toward a more true understanding of his teachings.
That’s interesting. I see where you’re getting the interchangeability now. I haven’t looked into yet, but based on how other versions handle the translation, I’m guessing it’s still supposed to be the man that is the ground which receives the word, and I’d think the word/seed grows in the man/ground either to produce fruit or not in this case. It doesn’t make sense in my mind to translate it suddenly in this verse as the man being the seed, since he’s already said that the seed is the gospel–I’m guessing we have an instance here of translator interpretation error due to ignorance of dirt and seeds. 
But, in any case, I don’t think it affects your point.
I fail to see the ‘finality’ which seems obvious to you in the passage. Are you getting that from this passage, or importing it from elsewhere?
You see the parable as being about 4 possible outcomes of the sower’s planting. I think it is more about understanding why the gospel is productive in some and not in others. That being that it is the work of God–the farmer–who prepares the land and assures the desired outcome. To one who understands that God desires all to come to repentance, this is a hopeful prospect. The fact that the land was unproductive in this growing season simply means to me that God has not yet brought that section into active use.
Obviously that’s because I look at the scripture from a universalist perspective. I begin with the premise that God’s stated intention is to reconcile all his creation to himself in Christ–summing up the all things in Him; that when Jesus is lifted up he will draw all to Himself.
I could easily put a Calvinist slant on the parable and say: The elect are the ground chosen and prepared by God to be fruitful in the gospel. The ‘unfruitful’ land is also part of God’s plan… the path serves for him to walk on, the weedy and rocky places provide wildlife habitat and a pleasant, natural contrast to the cultivated areas… 
Sonia
Hi Sonia,
I enjoyed reading your reply. It reminds me of Paul: He planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the life.
I think every person is the farm, and God is the farmer. The seed is the word of God. Some bits of that word we receive gladly, and they bear fruit immediately. Other bits we reject. Those parts of our life remains impoverished. But God is faithful. He wants his farm to be the best it can possibly be. (He’s going to live there forever.) He’ll break up those rocks, pull up those weeds.
It is speaking of the Kingdom of God is like…it is not speaking of salvation but how one hears the message of the Kingdom.
Jesus even tells us this:
**Matthew 13:17-23 **
17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.
18"Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: 19When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is the seed sown along the path. 20The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away. 22The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful. 23But the one who received the seed that fell on good soil is the man who hears the word and understands it. He produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown."
Is it that simple. I feel I’m each of those people. Today, I hear the word enthusiastically. Tomorrow I hear it reluctantly. The word is trodden underfoot now, but next week the same word is bearing fruit.
It’s the same with the sheep and the goats. I’m both things simultaneously. Today, I visit the sick and comfort the needy. Tomorrow, I sit on my bulbous buttocks and drink beer. I’m a walking contraction of motives and actions. Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God, says Paul, through Christ Jesus our Lord.
I think that the universalist could say that this is prior to the judgement. Are they right? That’s still the question!
That seems to be splitting hairs. What else could entry into the Kingdom be called, except Salvation?
Of course Jesus also told the Pharisees that the prostitutes and tax collectors would enter the kingdom before them - yet Paul gives a long list of people excluded from kingdom membership that sounds a lot like prostitutes and tax collectors (among others). So unless Jesus is merely using that turn of phrase to imply ‘never’ one must conclude that kingdom membership is a case of ‘when’ (and by which road the narrow way or the way of destruction) rather than ‘if’. The son who remained at home while his brother acted so irresponsibly is just livid at the unfairness of it all.
The elect are consistently spoken of in Paul’s writings in terms of a kind of firstfruits which when offered ensured that the rest of the harvest was acceptible. The phrase ‘especially of believers’ could indicate that this is the specialness that those who believe in this life enjoy… that they get to lead everyone else into the kingdom. The Jews couldn’t countenance the thought that those dirty Gentiles were going to be allowed into their club (and force them to the back of the queue too). The majority of Christians too seem to have a horror of those dirty unrepentant dead sinners somehow sneaking in as well…
The feast of Passover was held at the time of the Barley harvest in Spring. This crop ripened first and the germ separated from the husk by gentle winnowing (the overcomers?). The feast of Pentecost held a little later coincided with the wheat harvest - wheat needs threshing (a harsher process) to separate germ from husk (ordinary christians whose wood, hay and stubble need burning up?). The last major feast of the year was Tabernacles - when the grape harvest came in - grapes need crushing to release their juice (lake of fire anyone?).
Perhaps those feasts prophecy of something… who knows 
There are rulers, and there are subjects to that rule; salvation is to be reigning with Christ but salvation is not nessesarily meaning entry into the Kingdom.
I like the writings from the people at the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society. Even though they are not universalists they are very strong in their defense of the doctrine of Justification of Faith Alone. Dr. robert Wilking has written about this parable and states that it does not have to do with the losing of salvation for the ones who have exercised faith in the sacrifice and resurrection of Christ, but the losing of “Crowns” and gifts of the Christians who do not look for sanctification.
I disagree with him in his position of the first soil though.Since I believe that the Lord, who has taught us to love and forgive oru enemies, does forgive His enemies. I hold that the ones who belong to the first soil are judged in the end by knowing God’s sanctification (God as a consuming Fire), God’s Grace (God as Love), and their need of a Savior. Thus, tey accept Godd’s gra gift of salvation. This will be to late for them to gain a “Crown” but they will have salvation, since this is for all.
So what would be difference/s between entry into the Kingdom and Salvation?
Well, A good answer may be that the entrance to the Kingdom had to do with physical blessings. In my eschatological view, Preterism (Post-millenialism), I hold that most of the blessings and curses, parables, Matthew 24-25, and the like, had to do with the Jewish people people not being able to inherit the Kingdom, or the blessings of the Church, in this life. and suffered persecution and, even Gehena at the time. I also hold that in Bible chapters like in Hebrews 6, Jewish Christians who backslided during this time also suffered from the same fate. Thus the Kingdom is the Church Era and not Heaven.
Others, who do not hold to this eschatological tradition, may hold that even Christians may be judged for their works, not for salvation, but receiving Crowns (Positioind at the fulfilment of the Kingdom when Christ comeas again). A website from a group who believes in this can be see here. Mind you, they are not Universalists.
faithalone.org/journal/2003ii/wilkin.pdf
It is interesting that the author is answering Sungenis, a Roman Catholic apologist who was questioning the doctrine of Righteousnes by Faith.
You can also see more informatino on this position in the website:
faithalone.org
Also, a good book to read is “The reign of the Servant Kings” By one of the writers of this website.
You can see a similar position by a Universalist 7th Day Baptist in this paper whic has become a classic universalist reading:
auburn.edu/~allenkc/outcome.html
My words fall short from what he wrote here.
I believe that it’s important to not make a parable say more than it is meant to say. The parable of the sower is a metaphor that explains different ways we react to the word of God, depending on the condition of our hearts. It is not a statement concerning one’s ultimate salvation, but concerning how any of us can potentially embrace or reject the Word at any given point in time concerning any topic. For example, have you ever lost your peace, joy, love, and self control because of being worried about something? I have even though I’m saved. Or have you ever heard scripture that is contrary to your traditions, and quickly disregard the passage because you were not willing to consider that your traditions might be errant. I have. Thankfully though, many times though later I came to realize that my traditions were in error. Or have you ever reacted to someone in a completely inoppropriate harsh way because they touched a topic or area where you had been hurt before, where you were sensitive? I have.
Anyhow, like I said, it’s important to not make a parable say more than it is meant to say. Jesus is talking about our everyday response to the Word of God, not about whether a person is ultimately saved or not. And it’s significant to note that the passage highlights that it is God that chooses whether or not to open a person’s mind and heart to recieve the Word!
Mt.13: 10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?” 11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.
And, btw, there is much more to the Kingdom of God than just salvation! For example, for many years because of my traditions I would only skim over and quickly disregard scripture concerning spiritual gifts, thinking such was not for today. But one day the Lord opened my eyes to the possibility that I had been taught error and that such manifestations of the Spirit were for today, for even me. Long story short: I ended up recieving the word and have since then lived in that aspect of the Kingdom of God and seen and experienced manifestations of the Spirit like prophecy, words of knowledge and wisdom, healings, miracles, tongues and interpretation of tongues, etc.
Agree with you, Sherman, the blessings of the Kingdom are not only physical, but spiritual as well.
This eagerness to the make the parable of the sower about anything but salvation is worrying.
Ricky_13
The Kingdom of God that Jesus begins in Jerusalem will last forever (e.g. Isaiah 9), and there is no indication it’ll finish with Judgement day. While it’s true some events such as the fall of Jerusalem are prophesied and then fulfilled shortly afterwards, having to force every biblical prophecy into some sort of short term arbitrary historical reconstruction is very problematic. Furthermore you’d need to demonstrate that Jesus consistently taught two separate messages, one about salvation and one about the end of physical blessings, which would be difficult given the way the theme of salvation dominates the four gospels.
Sherman
If they were only a metaphor of how we react why do they describe the entire life span? “Other seeds feel among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them. Other seeds fell on good soil and produced grain.” Furthermore why are you (like Ricky_13 but in a different way) distinguishing between receiving the word and salvation? Isn’t receiving the word in good soil and then growing and producing fruit that is then harvested (the implication of the grain count) a description of salvation?
Hi Luke,
Nowhere in this parable or its explanation do we read anything about people being saved or lost after death. To assume that Jesus has anyone’s post-mortem fate in view is to go beyond what Jesus is teaching here. The blessing/salvation enjoyed by those who understand the word and bear fruit can be understood as a this-world reality. Jesus doesn’t alert us to the fact that all people will ultimately be saved “regardless of where they are planted” because, although true (and revealed elsewhere in Scripture), the purpose of this parable is not to reveal what happens to anyone after death.