Parable of the Sower (different interpretation).

Luke 8:4-8 King James Version (KJV)
4 And when much people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city, he spake by a parable:
5 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it.
6 And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture.
7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it.
8 And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Luke 8:11-15 King James Version (KJV)
11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.
14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.
15 But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.

The immediate interpretation of this passage is often that only the fourth type, the seed falling on good ground, is saved. There are some interpretations that may allow for the third type to also be saved. However, what if only the first type is not saved? The other three saved because they believed? This is important, as we will see. We must also consider the emphasis given on fruit bearing.

Right off the bat we see that it is the first seed/type that the devil comes to remove from their heart the word, so that they will not believe and be saved. Notice belief is the crux to salvation here, and the enemy knows this and this is why he seeks to remove the word from their heart. For if they believe, they shall be saved. We notice then, the subsequent types do believe (even for a while). The devil doesn't "cometh" for them, as the word is in their hearts.

Secondly, we must take note of the context. Bearing fruit is mentioned in verses fourteen and fifteen. It is the three types, following the first, that fruit is given emphasis. It is only the fourth type that "brings forth fruit with patience", but if we interpret these verses to mean only the fourth is saved are we suggesting that fruit is the means to salvation as opposed to belief? Even of the third type it is said they "bring no fruit to perfection", but since when has fruit been the prerequisite to being saved? Are we not saved by grace through faith?

Considering that contextually fruit bearing is given precedence, this parable seems to be emphasizing a productive walk as opposed to showing who is saved. We are saved unto good works, and for those that are found empty, we know they shall be saved yet so as by fire. It is for this reason that it appears that only the first type, who does not have the word in his/her heart (stolen by the devil) is not saved. Yet, the second, third, and fourth type are saved because they believed. However, it is only the fourth that is productive (bearing fruit). For the fourth type, their judgement will be with rejoicing as they receive rewards for walking in God's will, and prepared works.

Impossible. The 2nd type of soil falls into unbelief and the word does not abide (continue) in them. People who don't believe are not saved. Period. Doesn't matter if they used to believe, or never 'really' believed to begin with. They are in unbelief now and are not saved now.


The 2nd type of soil was saved while it believed and the word was abiding in it, although it did not believe deep enough or long enough to produce anything more than the spiritual fruit of joy.


Yes, this is a parable about fruit bearing. The subject of salvation is inferred from other scriptures. But the parable is about fruit bearing. This is hard for the church to grasp because it has so effectively, and erroneously, separated fruit bearing from salvation.


He does in the sense that he destroys the 2nd type of soil believer with trials and tribulations. And smothers the 3rd type with the worries and loves of this life, obviously, with the intent of getting them to no longer abide in the word too.



Absolutely not. The rest of scripture shows us it's impossible to infer that from the passage. Absolutely impossible. We have been taught that the Boogie Man in the church today is works salvation. Not even remotely true. The real enemy at work in the church is the 'grace is a license to sin' Boogie Man.

I wish I saw a church that was busy trying to keep the commands of God, if even only in their own power, but I don't. I see a church enamored with the lusts of the flesh and claiming they can still be saved despite their denial of the faith by their actions:

"They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. "-Titus 1:16.



Everybody knows fruit is not the prerequisite to salvation. What few know is, ultimately, fruit is the obligatory evidence of salvation. That truth is vehemently resisted by many in the church.



Of course we are. Everybody knows this. What few know is that if you're really saved by grace you will produce fruit as the obligatory outcome of one who has been forgiven his sin.


That is correct. It is a parable about fruit bearing--fruit bearing directly connected to whether or not the word is abiding in you, and you in it. Only those who abide in Christ and he in them can produce fruit. Without him we can do nothing.



Ultimately, no, not true. That would contradict James who says dead faith can not save. 1 Corinthians 3:8-15 is about ministerial service in the field and building of God, not about your personal holiness. We know that from the simple fact that if it's about personal obedience it directly contradicts James.



Correct. But 2nd type of soil stopped believing and the word did not abide (continue) in them so they ceased to be saved.

(2 Corinthians 10:5)

To believe "for a while" would indicate a mental belief in the Gospel, but no genuine conversion.
To bring "no spiritual fruit to perfection" also indicates a mental belief, or a false faith. Genuine saving faith results in conversion, and must therefore produce spiritual fruit.

The passage doesn't say that. But we have other scripture that shows this not to be true. For example, Jesus warned what will happen to the stumbling block who causes a 'little one who believes in him' to stumble and go to the eternal fire. Why was Jesus so concerned about fake, non-believers stumbling and going to the eternal fire if, 1) it's impossible for that to happen to real believers, and 2) they weren't really true believers to begin with?



The 2nd type of soil believer received the word with joy, a fruit of the Spirit. Obviously, Jesus was not saying the word was not in the soil and not growing (that's soil #1). He plainly said it did spring up. That means it was in the heart and did have some root, just not deep root because of the kind of soil it was in (rocky soil).

It's impossible to say the word never was in, and grew in, the heart of #2 believer. If that were true it would fall under the category of soil #1 where the word was snatched away before it could go in the heart and spring up.

No, the passage was not meant to say that. We must take all Gospel truth into account. Genuine conversion is not "believing for a while" since the New Birth takes place, and many other aspects of salvation come into play.

So those who are truly saved keep on believing, with the indwelling Holy Spirit reminding them of who they are in Christ. And God keeps them in that condition since He has predestined them for perfection and glorification ("salvation to be revealed in the last time").

Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. (1 Pet 1:5).

Again, to have no spiritual fruit is to have no saving faith (which at the very least produces good works).

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. (James 2:17)

What's the difference between the wheat and the tares? Fruit.

Am I bonkers= or, does not Jesus explain the meaning of the parable, dark saying, Himself???