Consider, then, the parable of the sower:
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Hymeis akousate oun tēn parabolēn tou speirantos
The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
The Parable of the Sower Explained
Matthew 13:18–23 — The Parable of the Sower Explained. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
Consider, then, the parable of the sower:
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Hymeis akousate oun tēn parabolēn tou speirantos
When anyone hears the message of the kingdom but 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.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Pantos akouontos ton logon tēs basileias kai mē synientos ho ponēros erchetai kai harpazei to esparmenon en tē autou kardia houtos estin ho spareis para tēn hodon
The seed sown on rocky ground is the one who hears the word and at once receives it with joy.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Ho spareis epi ta petrōdē houtos estin ho akouōn ton logon kai euthys lambanōn auton meta charas
But since he has no root, he remains for only a season. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
alla de echei en heautō ouk rhizan estin proskairos de thlipseōs ē diōgmou genomenēs dia ton logon euthys skandalizetai
The seed sown among the thorns is the one who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Ho spareis eis tas akanthas houtos estin ho akouōn ton logon kai hē merimna tou toutou aiōnos kai hē apatē tou ploutou sympnigei ton logon kai ginetai akarpos
But the seed sown on good soil is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and produces a crop—a hundredfold, sixtyfold, or thirtyfold.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Ho spareis epi tēn kalēn gēn houtos estin ho akouōn ton logon kai synieis hos dē karpophorei kai poiei men ho hekaton de ho hexēkonta de ho triakonta
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The verse opens with a pronoun Greek does not require. Ὑμεῖς sits in front of a second person plural imperative that already says “ye,” and Ellicott takes the whole point of the verse from that redundancy: “The ‘ye’ is emphatic. The interpretation which is withheld from others is given to you.” Pulpit agrees on grammatical grounds, preferring the Revised Version's “hear ye then” because it “leaves more room for the rightful emphasis on ye ( ὑμεῖς ),” and adds that οὖν means the hearing is commanded “in accordance with the privileges that have been given you.” Benson counts the summonses: Mark's “Hearken, behold,” then “who hath ears to hear, let him hear,” and now, “proceeding to the explanation of it, he calls for attention the fourth time.” Barnes, reasoning from Mark's rebuke rather than from Matthew, judges this the simplest of the parables, explained so that the disciples “might understand the general principles of interpreting others.” Poole states the aim of the explanation plainly: to show “the different effects which the word of God preached hath upon men's hearts, and the reasons of that difference.” ⚙ Note what the Greek does not do: it does not name the sower. σπείραντος is only a participle, “the one who sowed,” and Ellicott observes that the naming waits for the parable of the Tares.
Matthew builds the first soil on two participles of one root. The word in the heart is ἐσπαρμένον, a perfect: it stands sown. Then the man is σπαρείς, an aorist: he is classified. Between them stands ἁρπάζει, the verb of plunder, which Pulpit glosses “seizeth for himself.” The failure that admits the thief is μὴ συνιέντος, and the commentators agree it is not a deficiency of intellect: Ellicott calls the fault “moral rather than intellectual,” and Benson offers that the participle “may with equal propriety be rendered considereth it not,” comparing meditation to harrowing the seed under. Gill locates the same failure in a preposition: the word “only fell ‘upon’, not ‘into’ his heart.” Geneva's marginal note (a) protects the sower from the verdict: whether or not the seed is received, “he that sows, sows to the heart.” Ellicott raises the puzzle of the many birds standing for one Tempter and answers that everything which makes men forget the truth is, in very deed, doing the enemy's work. ⚙ The grammar of the sentence stages the theft: Παντὸς ἀκούοντος is a genitive absolute with no main subject, so the sentence itself has nothing standing in it until ὁ πονηρὸς arrives.
The second soil is bracketed by εὐθὺς, once for the joy and once for the collapse. Cambridge supplies the lexical fact that the Authorized Version hid behind two different idioms: “anon ] = immediately; the same Greek word is translated by and by in the next verse.” Ellicott draws the conclusion: “The rapidity of the renegade matches that of the convert.” Benson corrects the soil itself to “rocky, places, where the bed of earth was very shallow,” and the rare adjective πετρώδη (four verses in the New Testament) supports him: the problem is a floor, not a scatter of stones. What is missing is ῥίζαν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, and here the voices divide by theology. Ellicott makes the root “the conviction which ripens into a purpose.” Poole calls that conviction merely “the product of this root,” which is rather “a principle of grace in a heart truly touched with the love of God and of his truth.” Gill says the man has no root “in himself; Nor in Christ.” Benson, from the other tradition, credits even this man's joy to “the preventing grace of God.” On the joy itself, Barnes is coldly observant: the subsiding of fear produces its own peace, and so “they have only to imagine, therefore, that their sins are forgiven, to produce a certain kind of peace and joy.” The final verb is σκανδαλίζεται, which Barnes correctly defines as “Stumbles or falls, for this is the meaning of the word ‘offend’ in the New Testament.” Cambridge names the casualties: “The prospect of the cross took all enthusiasm away from Judas.”
The third soil fails by a slower method. συμπνίγει is a singular verb under a double subject: anxiety and deceit throttle as one hand. The rare compound (five verses) means to strangle completely, and Poole describes the mechanics without metaphor, thorns “shadowing the blade when it comes up, and keeping off the warmth of the sun, and drawing the fatness of the ground from it.” Ellicott diagnoses the man rather than the weeds: “while there is strength of purpose, there is not unity of spirit. The man is double-minded, and would fain serve two masters.” Benson protests against reading this as a parable about the rich only, noting the cares “most beset the poor, but not them only,” and then turns on riches themselves: “deceitful indeed! for they promise much, but perform little; offer themselves to many, but give themselves to few.” Henry supplies the older frame, that “Worldly cares are fitly compared to thorns, for they came in with sin, and are a fruit of the curse,” and the necessary qualification, that riches “cannot be said to deceive us unless we put our trust in them.” Pulpit adds the textual detail: the critical text reads simply τοῦ αἰῶνος, “of the age,” omitting τούτου. ⚙ Two of the three failing soils are defeated by a clock: the second man is πρόσκαιρος, the third is choked by the care of the αἰών.
The unit closes by reversing the word that opened it. μὴ συνιέντος at v. 19 becomes συνιείς here, and everything between is a study in hearing that never assembles. Ellicott insists “The process is not merely an intellectual one. He takes it in, discerns its meaning,” and harmonises Mark's “receive it” and Luke's “in an honest and good heart.” Poole numbers the whole sequence from the three Gospels: hearing, understanding or believing, keeping, bearing fruit, and bearing fruit with patience. On the origin of the good ground the sources genuinely differ in temperature. Ellicott raises the question and leaves it standing, noting only that theologians “may speak of ‘prevenient grace’”; Pulpit states the problem, says “this lay in a difference already existing within this good ground,” and then declines it, remarking that “Prevenient grace is not always to be insisted upon in practical exhortation”; Benson answers flatly that this is “a heart, not honest and good by nature, but made such by grace”; Gill agrees, “which no man naturally has... this is the work of God.” On the descending numbers Pulpit quotes Bengel: “100 longius absunt a 60, quam 60 a 30. Habenti dabitur.” Against any despair that arithmetic might breed, Poole: a soul may be honest and good in Christ's own judgment “though it doth not bring forth fruit in the same proportion with others,” and Henry: the good ground is not the ground without stones or thorns, but the ground with “none that could hinder its fruitfulness.” Ellicott ends by hearing an old prophet behind the whole parable, Jeremiah's “break up the fallow ground and sow not among thorns.”
⚙ Two silences are worth naming, and one of them a commentator names first. Ellicott observes that the four classes “seem to assume that their characters are fixed, incapable of change,” which would leave preaching with nothing to do but sort, and he answers that the parable “represents the phenomena of the spiritual life only partially”: the soil may be improved, and “it is the work of every preacher and teacher to prepare the soil as well as to sow the seed.” The second silence is the sower. The explanation identifies the seed (v. 19, the word of the kingdom), the thief (the evil one), the weeds and the soils, and never the man with the bag. Ellicott suggests the omission was deliberate, since the disciples “too were in their turn to be sowers as well as reapers.” ⚙ I record both as the tool's reading and neither as a certainty: the text of these six verses states the four outcomes and withholds their cause.
⚙ Fallible reading, offered to be tested. Read strictly, these six verses hold one constant and one variable. The constant is λόγος, which occurs in all four soils and is never said to differ in quality, quantity, or power. The variable is not hearing either: ἀκούων is predicated of all four men identically. The single word that separates the last soil from the first is συνίημι, denied at v. 19 and granted at v. 23, and the two middle soils are each destroyed by a clock, the one πρόσκαιρος and the other choked by the care of the αἰών. So the parable is not, in the first place, about sincerity or effort. It is about whether a hearer puts together what he has heard and keeps doing so through time. That yields a hard and an easy consequence together. The hard one: joy proves nothing (v. 20 has joy and no root), and neither does depth of engagement (v. 22 has both and still yields nothing), so the only stated evidence is fruit that continues. The easy one: the quantity of fruit is explicitly allowed to vary threefold and all three yields stand equally under the verdict “good soil,” which Poole read exactly so. On the question the text refuses, why one soil was καλή, I will not manufacture an answer from these verses. Ellicott left it open, Pulpit set it aside, Benson and Gill answered it from elsewhere in Scripture, and the parable itself simply says the ground was noble and the yield was real. ⚙ Where the text is silent I take the silence to be the teaching: the command in v. 18 is to hear, not to first establish which soil one is.
Joy is not evidence and depth is not evidence; the only evidence this parable names is fruit that keeps coming. (⚙ tool's reading, not a verse)
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The verb of the third soil, συμπνίγει (G4846), is a rare compound: five verses in the whole New Testament. Mark uses it of these same thorns (4:7), and Luke uses it of the multitude that pressed so close around Jesus on the way to Jairus's house that they nearly crushed him (8:42). The Verifier confirms the shared lexeme in both pairs, and Mark 4:7 shares ἄκανθα (G173) as well. ⚙ The word does not mean uproot or poison: Poole's description of the mechanism fits it exactly, the blade is shaded, the sun kept off, the fatness of the ground drawn away. The plant is left alive and denied air. The overlap with Luke 8:42 is lexical, and I press it no further than that.
Mark 4:7 · Luke 8:42
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G4846 συμπνίγω (in 5 vv, rare) with both Mark 4:7 and Luke 8:42; Mark 4:7 additionally shares G173 ἄκανθα (in 11 vv). All Greek to Greek, so the shared Strong's numbers are a genuine verbal link.
πρόσκαιρός (G4340), “for the occasion only,” occurs in four verses of the New Testament. Paul uses it of the visible world: the things which are seen are πρόσκαιρα, the unseen eternal (2 Corinthians 4:18). Hebrews uses it of what Moses turned down, the πρόσκαιρον enjoyment of sin (11:25). The Verifier confirms the shared lexeme in both. ⚙ The force of the link is that Matthew applies to a person the adjective the other two apply to a thing: the second hearer has taken the character of what he refused to let go of. Note that the word here is a predicate, not an adverb of duration; the Greek does not say he lasts a while, it says he is temporary.
2 Corinthians 4:18 · Hebrews 11:25
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G4340 πρόσκαιρος (in 4 vv, rare) with 2 Corinthians 4:18 and Hebrews 11:25. The Hebrews 11:25 pair also shares G2228 ἤ (in 276 vv), a common particle that carries no weight and is disregarded. No quotation is claimed, only the rare lexeme.
πετρώδη (G4075), “rock-like,” occurs in four verses and every one of them is this parable: Matthew 13:5 and 13:20, Mark 4:5 and 4:16. The Verifier also records εὐθέως (G2112) shared with Matthew 13:5 and Mark 4:5, the same adverb that brackets vv. 20 and 21. ⚙ The link is simply the pairing of parable and interpretation across the synoptics, but the lexical distribution is worth noting: the word for this soil exists in Scripture only to describe this failure. Benson's correction, “into stony, rather, rocky, places,” is carrying the lexical sense correctly.
Matthew 13:5 · Mark 4:5
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G4075 πετρώδης (in 4 vv, rare) and G2112 εὐθέως (in 86 vv) with both Matthew 13:5 and Mark 4:5. Greek to Greek within the synoptic tradition.
The unit's last three words, ἑκατὸν, ἑξήκοντα, τριάκοντα (G1540, G1835, G5144), repeat the yields of the parable proper at Matthew 13:8, and Mark 4:8 carries the same pair of the less common numerals. ⚙ The order descends in Matthew and ascends in Mark, which is a real difference and not a textual problem; nothing in the brief settles why. Pulpit preserves Bengel's reading of the gaps, that a hundred stands further from sixty than sixty from thirty, “Habenti dabitur.” Poole's counterweight stands in the same breath: unequal yield does not unmake good ground.
Matthew 13:8 · Mark 4:8
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G5144 τριάκοντα (in 11 vv) and G1835 ἑξήκοντα (in 9 vv) with Matthew 13:8 and Mark 4:8; Matthew 13:8 also shares G3303 μέν (in 180 vv, common) and Mark 4:8 shares G1093 γῆ (in 223 vv, common), neither of which carries weight. The numerals are uncommon enough to bear the tier.
The Verifier's strongest-scoring candidates for this unit are the parallel interpretations: Mark 4:15 to 4:20 and Luke 8:14. ⚙ But their computed bases are the commonest words in the New Testament, λόγος (318 verses), ἀκούω (398 verses), σπείρω (42 verses), and shared vocabulary of that frequency proves nothing by itself. I therefore record this link structurally rather than verbally: the basis is that these are the same pericope, told by the other two synoptists, and every commentator in the brief works from all three at once. Poole takes the identification of the seed from Luke 8:11 and the identification of the sower from Mark 4:14; Ellicott takes “in an honest and good heart” from Luke; Benson and Gill take the “lusts of other things” and the “pleasures of this life” from Mark and Luke respectively. None of that is in Matthew's text.
Mark 4:15 · Mark 4:19 · Mark 4:20 · Luke 8:14
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G3056 λόγος (in 318 vv), G191 ἀκούω (in 398 vv), G4687 σπείρω (in 42 vv) across Mark 4:15 to 4:20 and Luke 8:14. Deliberately downgraded from verbal: the lexemes are too common to establish a quotation, and the real basis is that these are the synoptic parallels to the same discourse.
Ellicott, commenting on this verse, hears an older text under the whole parable: the hearers are to “break up the fallow ground and sow not among thorns” (Jeremiah 4:3), “the words of an old prophet, which might almost seem to have suggested the parable itself.” ⚙ The two failing images of this unit, ground trodden hard and ground full of thorns, are exactly the two the prophet names, and the remedy he commands is a working of the soil, which is what Ellicott elsewhere says preachers must do. This link cannot be tiered verbal: Matthew is Greek and Jeremiah is Hebrew, so there is no shared Strong's number to compute, and the Verifier offered no basis for the pair. The recorded basis is Ellicott's own citation and the shared pair of images.
Jeremiah 4:3
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so shared Strong's numbers are impossible and a verbal tier is excluded on principle. The basis is the named source: Ellicott cites Jeremiah 4:3 at Matthew 13:23, plus the shared motif pair of unbroken ground and thorns. No quotation is claimed and the Verifier computed no lexical link.
Henry, writing on the thorny ground, closes the image with a citation: worldly cares “are entangling, vexing, scratching, and their end is to be burned, Heb 6:8.” ⚙ The passage there does describe ground that drinks the rain and bears thorns, and is rejected and near to cursing. But I did not find this pair among the Verifier's computed candidates, so I have no lexical basis to record, and I have not run the check myself. I flag it: the connection is Henry's, it is plausible and old, and it is unverified here.
Hebrews 6:8
basis: No Verifier-computed shared lexeme for this pair; the link rests solely on Matthew Henry's own marginal citation at Matthew 13:22 (“their end is to be burned, Heb 6:8”). Provenance of the association is a single commentator, and the lexical overlap is unverified. Downgraded deliberately rather than asserted.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
The explanation identifies the seed, the thief, the weeds and the four soils, and never identifies the man who sowed. Ellicott notices the omission and gives the canonical answer: “The interpretation is given in the parable of the Tares (‘the Sower of the good seed is the Son of Man’),” and suggests the silence was pedagogical, since the disciples “too were in their turn to be sowers as well as reapers.” Poole says the same from Mark: “the sower is the preacher, Christ in the first place, then all who derive from him as his ministers.” Henry states it without qualification: “The sower is our Lord Jesus Christ, by himself, or by his ministers.” ⚙ Grammatically the point holds: σπείραντος is a participle, a man defined by an act already done, and Matthew supplies his name eighteen verses later. This is the plain and long-held reading, recorded here by Ellicott, Poole and Henry alike.
Matthew 13:37 · Mark 4:14
The verdict on the second soil is οὐκ ἔχει ῥίζαν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, and Gill's first move is to refuse the reflexive as a resting place: “Yet hath he not root in himself, ... Nor in Christ.” Poole reaches the same conclusion by another road, identifying the root not with resolve but with “a principle of grace in a heart truly touched with the love of God and of his truth,” which he equates with what “the apostle calls the seed of God.” ⚙ Paul's word for the believer's security is the cognate verb: rooted (ἐρριζωμένοι, from ῥιζόω) and built up in him (Colossians 2:7), and Christ's own image is the branch that cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides (John 15:4). I record the relation between ῥίζα and ῥιζόω as a lexical family resemblance, not as a Verifier-computed link, because the Verifier did not compute this pair. The theological point does not rest on the etymology: what the second hearer lacked was not stamina but union, and the text names its absence rather than its supply.
Colossians 2:7 · John 15:4
⚙ This is the tool's own reading and I mark it as such. Matthew's unit ends with seed in καλὴν γῆν yielding a hundred. John records Jesus saying that unless the grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies it abides alone, but if it dies it bears much fruit (John 12:24), and applying it to his own hour. Paul makes the same harvest the ground of the resurrection: Christ the firstfruits of them that slept (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23). ⚙ So the parable's final image, a sown thing that yields far more than was put in, is the image Jesus himself later chose for his death. None of the commentators in this brief draws that line at Matthew 13:23; Ellicott's christological note here is about the sower, not the seed. I therefore mark this reading novel, offer it to be tested, and do not build any claim about this unit's meaning upon it.
John 12:24 · 1 Corinthians 15:20
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
Text. The BSB base text is followed throughout. One variant is recorded in the sources: at v. 22 Pulpit notes the critical text reads τοῦ αἰῶνος alone, “omitting the τούτου of the Received Text,” so the familiar “this world” rests on a reading the Revisers did not follow. BSB renders the phrase “this life,” which departs from the lexical sense of αἰών (properly, an age) in either reading; the note at v. 22 index 17 flags this.
Grammar. Four times in this unit Matthew writes a masculine participle where the sense wants a neuter (ὁ σπαρείς, “the man sown,” at vv. 19, 20, 22, 23). Ellicott says our translators “try, unsuccessfully, to combine the parable with its interpretation”; Pulpit defends the masculine as deliberate. BSB regularises it to “The seed sown ... is the one who hears.” Readers should know the smoothing is there.
Sources. Ten commentators are attached to this passage in the brief; nine are cited. JFB is not, and the reason should be stated: the JFB entry reproduced at every verse of this unit is the note on Matthew 13:17 followed by the introduction to the parable of the Tares, and contains nothing on vv. 18 to 23. Citing it would have misrepresented what Jamieson, Fausset and Brown wrote about these verses. Henry's entry is likewise a single block on Matthew 13:1 to 23 reprinted at each verse, so his one citation here is placed where it actually touches the text. Several Geneva entries are the bare verse text with no gloss; the one substantive marginal note (at v. 19) is cited. The Benson entries at 13:19 and 13:22 are capped in the brief and were not fetched in full, so his argument may extend past what is quoted here.
Threads. Every Verifier candidate offered for this unit is a New Testament verse, so the Greek-to-Greek shared lexemes are usable as verbal bases. Where the computed basis was a high-frequency word (λόγος in 318 verses, ἀκούω in 398), the thread was deliberately downgraded to structural even though the synoptic parallel is certain. The Jeremiah 4:3 thread is cross-Testament and therefore cannot be tiered verbal on principle; it rests on Ellicott's citation. The Hebrews 6:8 thread rests on Henry's citation alone, with no computed lexical basis, and is flagged accordingly.
What is uncertain. The parable does not say why one soil was καλή, and the sources in this brief disagree about whether the question may even be asked here: Ellicott raises it and leaves it, Pulpit sets it aside as unsuitable for exhortation, Benson and Gill answer it from Ezekiel 36:26 and from doctrine rather than from this text. The synthesis above reports that disagreement and does not resolve it. The descending order of the three yields in Matthew against the ascending order in Mark is noted and not explained; nothing in the brief accounts for it.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)