PARABLE OF THE WHEAT AND THE TARES (MATTHEW 13:24-30, 36-43)

This parable and the Parable of the Sower are the only two to actually be given a title in the text. This parable is almost an allegory since most of the details are explained.

Some commentators don't like this parable and doubt whether it came from Jesus at all. But their reasons for rejecting it can all be easily countered. They include: a denial that Jesus ever spoke in allegories, language that is foreign to Jesus and obviously came from Matthew himself, rejection of any judgment teachings coming from Jesus, the doubt that Jesus ever viewed his ministry as a worldwide one, and the supposed mismatch between the parable and its given interpretation. Snodgrass states that the interpretation does match the parable but also goes beyond it to focus more on the theme of judgment. Thus, it emphasizes future judgment. This is confirmed by the rule of end stress and by Gundry's contention that identification of Jesus with the kingdom rather than the Father indicates a stress on judgment.

Read vv. 24-30

Verse 24 The opening words of these kingdom parables have always confused me. “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who” really means “The kingdom of heaven is like the situation in which a man.”

Matthew uses the phrase Kingdom of Heaven rather than Kingdom of God, which is found in the other Gospels. Early dispensationalists taught that this was a clear reference to two distinct time periods, one during the millennium. This argument has been totally discredited since then. The more common explanation is that Matthew wrote to a mainly Jewish audience who used synonyms like "heaven" to avoid saying the word God. This parable also contains references to the kingdom of the Son of Man. Snodgrass sees no distinction between these three designations.

Physical picture

There are about 100 references to reaping/harvesting in the Bible. (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery) Tares or weeds = bearded darnel which is related to rye grass and resembles wheat, especially in the young plants. They need to be removed before harvesting. Darnel roots itself more firmly than wheat. Special problems with darnel are the poisonous nature of ripe darnel seeds and the fact that darnel is host to a deadly fungus. (Hendricksen) The leaves of both are almost identical in appearance until the ears appear. Rabbis considered darnel to be corrupt wheat. (Bible Knowledge Comm.) The servants are impatient and want to separate them now.

Even the story of an enemy sowing the seeds has its roots in reality. “Roman law dealt specifically with the crime of sowing darnel in a wheat field as an act of revenge.” (France, Matthew)

Read vv. 36-43

There is a major controversy as to whether the church or the world is the setting.

Verse 38 says that the field is the world. This warns that the reference is not just to the institutional church. (Blomberg)  However, v. 41 ("His Kingdom") seems to apply to the church. (France)

Assuming for now that the story applies mainly to the church, then does this negate the idea of church discipline? See I Corinthians 5:5, etc. When we consider the church as a mixed multitude, do we start to look around at who is probably not saved or do we first look to ourselves? I like to give the apostles a rough time for their lack of comprehension, but consider the Last Supper when each of them asks, “Is it I, Lord?” instead of “Is it he?”

There is a specific contrast to the Dead Sea community which excluded law breakers so that only a pure people would remain at the final judgment. (Bietenhard)

“One cannot become a disciple as long as one thinks that one's vocation should be primarily negative, judgmental, a vocation to fight evil.” (Patte)

“His creation can be purged of all evil only through the judgment and re-creation of the universe at the end of the age because evil resides in every person.” (Blomberg)

This parable combats eschatological impatience. (Hill)

Verse 39. Satan is “a spoiler, not a constructive authority in his own right.” (France)  There is no such thing as a flash-dark.

Angels appear as reapers in Matthew 24:31 and Revelation 14:17-20. But the Son of Man is the reaper in Revelation 14:14-16. There is no real contradiction.

Verse 40 “The consummation of the natural order” can mean “the end of the present age.” (look at other translations)

Isaiah 18:5-6 talks about pruning the vines at the right time only.

Verse 41 contains an allusion to Zephaniah 1:3: “I shall wipe out the birds in the sky and the fish in the sea and the stumbling blocks with the wicked.”

Verse 43 "righteous shining like the sun" – see Daniel 12:3: “Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky.” Other hints of Daniel in this story include the mention of the “son of man” (Daniel 12:3) and the fiery furnace.

Verses 41-43 Membership in the messianic community in no way guarantees inclusion among the righteous in the kingdom of the Father (see Daniel 12:1: “But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone who is found written in the book.”)

Verse 50 Gnashing of teeth usually connotes anger, but the context of suffering and weeping seems to indicate remorse and pain here. (McComiskey)

Interpretation

Augustine used this parable to argue against the Donatists who wanted to exclude those church members who had recanted during persecution. They felt that the church should remain uncontaminated. And when the church gained power, the discussion even centered around whether this parable allowed for the execution of heretics or not.

Most commentators read this as a parable about the mixed nature of the church, but Snodgrass disagrees. He feels it is the most misused of all of Jesus' parables in this way. “It is not a parable about church discipline.” He points out that 13:38 clearly explains that the field is not the church; it is the world. Therefore it “is about the fact that the righteous and sinners coexist in the world – even when the kingdom is present.” “...life is not fair even though Christ and his kingdom have come. God is not the only one at work, and not all actions in this world can be attributed to God.”

Here are some other interpretations that Snodgrass rejects:

    1. Some feel that the parable teaches total passivity in the face of evil. “We must stop being evil, and we must stop evil from destroying, but how can we stop evil without becoming evil in the process? That may well be the human question.”

    2. Another faulty interpretation is the idea that the parable deals with the coexistence of good and evil within individuals.

    3. Neither does it deal with the relationship of Matthew's church with the Synagogue.

    4. One possible interpretation is that the parable is Jesus' apologetic for gathering together sinners. However, it is unlikely that Jesus would have referred to them as weeds sown by the enemy.

Snodgrass finally believes that the parable deals with the question of why the kingdom of evil (whether referring to sinful Jews or the Romans) was still present if the kingdom of God had truly come. Another major message is that God is patient and waits until the true character of the plants reveals itself. There is a danger in separating them too soon. It is not our place to do the separating. Judge not. Even Jesus said that he did not come to earth to judge (at that time).