Holding all things together (Colossians 1:16-20)

In Colossians 1:16-20, Paul presents a neat little chiastic poem of praise to God for the glorious redemption he accomplished for the Gentiles in Colossae: 

A)  For "in him" (en auto), "through him" (dia autou), and "into him" (eis auton) all things were created  (v. 16)

     

     B)  He is before all things (pro panton) and in him (en auto) all things hold together  (v. 17)

     

          C)  He is the head of the body, the Church  (v. 18a)

     

     B')  He is the beginning (arxe), the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he himself (en pasin autos) he might be preeminent  (v. 18b)

A')  For "in him" (en auto), "through him" (dia autou), and "into him" (eis auton) all things were reconciled through the blood of the cross  (vv. 19-20)

The language used here by Paul should remind us of the way God works throughout all of history, but with a singular focus in mind: God created all things with a body for himself in mind. He receives the preeminence in all things, but because he is the head of his body, the Church, she too receives an eminent place in creation. All things in creation were created in, through, and into him, but his desire from all eternity--before the beginning--was to share all things with His Bride. All things hold together in him, including what fell into sin because of Adam, but Jesus came to begin a new creation, beginning with his incarnation and working reconciliation between God and man through his death and resurrection, through the blood of the cross. God's story--the overarching story of history--is a story of creation, fall, and recreation in, through, and into Christ Jesus; but let's not forget that it's also a story he shares with his bride, the Church. It is not a story of creation to recreation merely for himself. It's a story which moves from glorious creation to even more glorious creation, holding all things together for the glory of he and his bride together. 

Did Jesus have to pay taxes? (Matthew 17:24-27)

In Matt 17:24-27 Peter is confronted about his "teacher's" doctrine about paying the annual temple-tax, and then Jesus has a talk with him about it privately afterward. As I was studying the background to this passage, I learned that the "liberal" Sadducees disapproved of this temple-tax, and members of the "separatist" Qumran community only paid it once in a lifetime because it was thought to be a recent Pharisaical institution accepted under Roman Law. The "conservative" Pharisees based their promotion of the Temple-Tax on Torah regulations from the book of Exodus, and it was in their favor to promote the upkeep of Herod's monumental Temple in Jerusalem. Of course, the upkeep of the temple had its advantages for the Roman empire as well. But it was especially a win-win situation for the Pharisees because the priests and Rabbis among them were exempt from the temple tax, whereas all others throughout the region had to pay it begrudgingly.

Jesus and Peter both seem to recognize this kind of favoritism in their day. Jesus asks Peter if the "kings of the earth" exact taxation from their children or from others in their land, and Peter's response is short and to the point: certainly not from their own children, but from others instead. In context it seems that Jesus speaks of "children" and "others" to distinguish between those close to kings--those favored like family--and those who are likened unto servants and serfs. Jesus then argues somewhat strangely, as though he has this cultural favoritism in mind. Yet it's not entirely clear as to how he's associating himself and Peter with the favored "sons." He states conclusively that "the sons are free," but then he tells Peter "however, just so we don't lay a stumbling-block before them," give them a shekel (v. 27). It's taken for granted that "sons" don't have to pay the temple-tax because they are family among the kingdoms of the earth. But Jesus says 'however, let's pay it,' implying that this principle applies to his kingdom as well. Perhaps Jesus is implying he is the King of kings, and all tribute belongs to his Kingdom primarily, and so the children of his kingdom are exempt. That's one possibility. Or perhaps the implication is that he is the Son of Yahweh, a chief Rabbi and Priest of the Most High God whose house (the temple) is receiving the collected tax, and therefore he and the children of Yahweh's house are exempt in a similar way with the favored "sons" in his day. Either way, both of these views assume that Jesus is implying his own freedom and the freedom of those "sons" in relation to Him. This is a very common interpretation among expositors. However, I favor a third alternative. 

It does seem that Jesus is contrasting "sons" of one kingdom with "sons" of another, but as I see it, Jesus' focus is on the "sons" of a kingdom that is not of his own. Jesus says that "the sons are free….and in order to not lay a stumbling-block before them" he thinks it's best to pay them the shekel they require of him. In this statement, the "sons" are those collecting the tax from Jesus and Peter, and they are the free ones. In other words, this confrontation of Peter and his teacher (Jesus) demonstrates that they are of another kingdom, and that they know they are not favored like family among the kings of the earth. Jesus is not acknowledged as the King of kings and Lord of lords as he ought to be, nor is Peter acknowledged as having the keys to the kingdom of heaven, which Jesus stated a few verses before this (16:18-19). 

This direct challenge of Jesus' kingdom and Kingship, and even Peter's apostolic authority, is even more clear when the literary structure of Matt. 16:13-17:27 is examined closely. Matthew lays out this section with a neat chiastic structure. Notice the common words and phrases in between A and A', indicating that they were intended to be mutually interpretive:

A) 16:13-23 -- "Simon", "Peter", "earth", "give", βασιλεία ("kingdom"), σκάνδαλον ("stumbling-block"), Jesus will "be killed" and "be raised on the third day"

   B) 16:24-28 -- Jesus speaks (εἶπον) to his disciples, "truly I say to you"

      C) 17:1 -- Ascending the high "mountain"

         D) 17:2-8 -- Transfiguration w/ a mention of three tents 

      C') 17:9-13 -- Descending  the "mountain"

   B') 17:14-21 -- Disciples speak (εἶπον) to Jesus, and Jesus replies: "truly I say to you"

A') 17:22-27 -- "Simon", "Peter", "earth", "give", βασιλεύς ("kings"), σκανδαλίσωμεν ("stumbling-block"), Jesus will "be killed" and "be raised on the third day" 

With these parallels in mind, it seems that Jesus addresses Peter with his previous conversation in mind. Jesus had already told Peter about his soon-coming death and resurrection on the third day, and that he would give Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven. However, when Peter is confronted by tax-collectors, Jesus realizes that their interrogation of Peter was a challenge to his earthly authority. Jesus and his disciples are not treated as "sons" of the present kingdom because they were not. They were "sons" of another kingdom, a kingdom in the world but not of the world. Peter was interrogated about his "teacher" (Jesus) paying the temple-tax, but Jesus viewed their interrogation as a trap of sorts, indicating that increased hostility toward Jesus was immanent if he refused to support their kingdom. 

This idea of entrapment is even more noticeable when the Greek text is examined closely. Jesus miraculously provides a shekel to cover the temple-tax, and the ESV translates his concluding remarks in verse 27 this way:

Take that [shekel] and give it to them for me and for yourself.

However, Jesus does not tell Peter to give the shekel to them "for" himself and  "for" Peter. The literal rendering of what Jesus said was this:

Take that [shekel] and give it to them instead of me and you.

Jesus tells Peter to pay it "instead of" (Greek: ἀντὶ) himself and Peter, paying in the place of himself and Peter. (The second appearance of the word "for" in the ESV is not in the Greek text at all.) According to the Greek text, one can hardly miss the notion of "ransom" behind Jesus' words. Jesus knows he is soon to be delivered into the hands of the elders and chief priests and scribes (16:21; 17:22), and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day (vv. 22-23). But Jesus knows it's not that time yet. First he must inspect his Father's house for the way they abuse the tax, making the temple a den of robbers instead of a house of prayer. First he must confront the rulers of Israel and condemn them as faithless sons of the kingdom. First he must tell them that the kingdom of God will be taken away from them and given to a people producing its fruits. Then he will give his life as a ransom for many. Then he will deliver himself as a tribute offering required for the building of Yahweh's house.

Sowing the Word of the Kingdom (Matt 13:1-23)

We have finally arrived at the center of Matthew's gospel: chapter thirteen. Chapter thirteen is the third extensive discourse of Matthew's gospel (as seen here and here), and it's most obvious attribute is it's emphasis on parables. It can also be divided into three large sections (as seen here). In the following series of posts on chapter thirteen, I will be using Layout #2 as presented in that post. In this post I will be commenting on the first section of that layout (Matt. 13:1-23; A1, B1, & C1).

In sections A1 & C1 of that layout, Jesus delivers and explains his famous "parable of the sower," and in that parable four types of soil have "seed" sown on them. The typical approach to that parable is to interpret Jesus' words as describing something entirely future. In other words, Christians today often interpret these parables as the time which began with the incarnation of Jesus and will end at the consummation of global human history. However, that will not be my approach to the text. Instead I will be treating the "field" and world of these parables as the field and world in which Israelites lived, scattered throughout the Roman empire of that day, and I will be treating the time-frame of these parables as describing the culmination of the end of the old covenant age. That is to say, instead of describing the entire future history of humanity on earth earth, Jesus instead seems to be describing the last days of the Old Covenant and that present age in which the word of his kingdom could be sown. 

Moreover, because the first three types of seed-embedded soil are often presumed by Christians today as describing pagans and "outsiders" of God's covenant family, and there doesn't seem to be any immediate indication of those factors, that also will not be my approach to interpreting these parables in context. 

As an example of what this might look like today, it would probably help to offer a sample of a modern typical approach to this parable. That might look like the following:

With the first seed sown "beside the road" (v. 4), creatures come and devour them. These could not possibly be covenant members of God's family because they are completely devoured, or so it is believed. With the second seed sown on "rocky places," there is little soil (v. 5). The sun scorches them after growing a little, but they, like those "beside the road," also wither away and die. Again, this seed is believed to be outside of the covenant people of God because they eventually wither away and die. The third seed is also similar, having been sown "among the thorns" (v. 7). That eventually gets choked and withers away. But the fourth seed is different. The fourth seed is a "believing" seed, a covenant-member-seed, which falls on good soil and yields a huge crop. It's a "regenerate" crop. Bottom line: the fourth seed is an "elect" crop and the first three are not, or so it has been treated.

I'm going to suggest an alternative to this. Given the progressing context of Matthew's gospel so far, it seems that all four seeds are sown among God's covenant people, the land and people where the people of Israel dwell as a whole, without further distinction or emphasis (especially not upon "regeneration" or "election"). Surely no honest theologian or historian believes that all of Israel who received God's word in the first century would endure to the end. First century history is abundantly clear that not all of Israel would follow Jesus and His apostles up to the point of old Jerusalem's destruction in 70 A.D.. And that actually helps clarify what the Apostles would expect to see in the last days of the old covenant. They would expect to see vast blessings of faith from sowing the word of Christ's kingdom on earth, but only a remnant of Israel would remain faithful to the end. A new Israel, an Israel of faith whose seed is of Abraham through faith in Christ (Gal. 3) would emerge from the rubble of the old creation. Just because some did not endure to the end does not mean all four seeds could not possibly be describing all of Israel, who all were generally recognized to be the covenant people of God. If Jesus was describing all of Israel, which generally is a description of all of God's covenant people, then the underlying principles of Jesus' parables could apply to the new covenant church as well. Just like Israel of old, the christian church today contains hypocrites and others with faith as frail as soap bubbles. But the only way to find out in time and history if someone is a hypocrite, or just plain weak in faith, or whatever, is if they are first identified among God's covenant people as God's covenant people. And that seems to be the kind of scenario Jesus is describing in his parables. He seems to be describing Israel. He seems to be describing seeds that are scattered across the land of God's covenant people as a whole.

This brings up an important factor worthy of a brief digression. God's people, in time and history, are identified by their inclusion in the covenant, not by their hypocrisy (or lack thereof). Hypocrisy is a measure of one's faithfulness to the covenant, not a boundary marker of the covenant itself. If two people are married and one of them is a hypocrite, i.e. an unfaithful spouse, there is still a covenant between the two. The same is true about God's covenant with Israel. So this parable of the sower should be thought of as describing, not only hypocrites with faith as stable as an upright toothpick, but also enemies of the faith outside the covenant. In Jesus' first century context, the hypocrites would be those of Israel who would follow Jesus for a time, but then revert back to the idolatries of Judaism and it's old covenant temple, priesthood, and sacrificial system. The main point of all this is that unfruitful seed-embedded-soils can be among those identified with God's covenant family.

In verses 18-23 (section C1) Jesus describes the "seed" as "the word of the kingdom." Notice carefully that he does not describe it as the word of God. There is a difference. The difference is obvious too. The difference is that the word of the kingdom is much more specific and pointed in its focus. In a previous post I described what the "kingdom of heaven" is (and no, the answer is not "heaven"). The kingdom of heaven is life in union with Christ under the new covenant. The kingdom of heaven is not a place called "heaven," therefore the "word of the kingdom" is not a word about a place called "heaven" either. Rather, the "word of the kingdom" is the word about the kingdom of heaven being very near in its arrival in the first century (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; 10:7), with only some of its hearers actually entering into it. The word of the kingdom is the proclamation of good news about entering the new covenant administration under King Jesus (Matt. 5:19-20; 7:21; 11:12).

This explains much of what Jesus was describing when he mentioned "the mystery of the kingdom of heaven" being given to his disciples, but not to the remainder of his audience, which only received parables of the kingdom of heaven (vv. 10-11). The eyes and ears of the apostles are blessed because they see and hear the King and His Kingdom coming. They also have the King of the kingdom of heaven revealing and explaining the mystery of His kingdom to them, but not to others. The unique privilege of having this mystery revealed to them is even more obvious when connected with the previous discourse of Jesus to his disciples in chapter ten. There Jesus revealed to them and commissioned them to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel preaching that the kingdom of heaven was near (10:5-7), and that judgment upon the house of Israel was near as well (10:16-23). That judgment included the removal of Israel's landed inheritance, or, to speak in terms which Matthew records Jesus as saying,  "for whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away" (13:10-12). 

All of what Jesus was saying about having an losing makes perfect sense in this context of the kingdom coming near along with God's judgment upon unfaithful Israel. Perhaps the connections might be easier to understand if the translation was amplified a bit. By studying B1 together as one unit (13:10-17), it's easier to grasp a summary idea of what Jesus was describing in 13:10-12: 

"For whoever has [been granted to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven], to him more [knowledge] shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have [knowledge of the mystery of the kingdom granted], even what he has [been given] shall be taken away from him." 

For Jesus, "having" and "taking away" has to do with something near to that generation, which would most clearly refer to Israel's inheritance in the kingdom under the rule of King Jesus. Those who know that the Kingdom is near will strive to enter into it. Those who don't will lose their inheritance. Israel as a whole is addressed, and the word of the kingdom of heaven is scattered among them all, but not all of Israel will endure to the end and inherit the kingdom. At that point when the old covenant creation comes to an end, even what has been given to many Israelites shall be taken away, because knowing Jesus they glorified him not as God, neither were they thankful. Whoever does not follow King Jesus, even what he has shall be taken away by 70 A.D. But the one who follows Jesus to the end, to him more shall be given.

In verse 14, Jesus says that in their case --that is, the case of Israel who would reject the word of the kingdom of heaven preached to them-- "the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled." The word used here by Jesus and translated as "fulfilled" is anapleroutai, which is quite different in its emphasis than other times the word "fulfill" pops up in Matthew's gospel. In Greek, anapleroutai describes the filling-full to the brim of that which is lacking. In brief it means to really fill full. Therefore Jesus, by quoting Isaiah 6:9-10 (cf. Matt. 13:15), was teaching his apostles that the promise of judgment inflicted upon Israel in the days of Isaiah was only a partial outpouring of God's wrath, and if they imagine for one second that God's wrath upon Israel back then (in the days of Isaiah) was great, the outpouring of God's wrath upon the generation of Jesus' apostles would be much greater; and the correlative deliverance for God's people, the new Jerusalem, at that time would be exceedingly great as well. The winepress of God's wrath would press upon old covenant Jerusalem and fill up all seven bowls to the fullest before the new Jerusalem would descend from heaven. This, of course, means that the new Jerusalem is analogous to the kingdom of heaven,1 but I'll save more conversations about that for another post, for another time.

1. Doug Wilson's comments in this regard are particularly insightful and worthy of further reflection. He writes: "The New Jerusalem is not the same thing as heaven, but it necessary to say a few things about it here. This is because much of the imagery we have of heaven comes, not from the biblical descriptions of heaven, but from the descriptions of the New Jerusalem—pearly gates, streets of gold, and so forth. This confusion is perpetuated principally through hymns and cartoons. The New Jerusalem is a biblical metaphor for the Christian church—both on earth and in heaven. This identification is not speculation—it is explicitly made in Scripture." -- Douglas Wilson, The Forgotten Heavens: Six Essays on Cosmology [Moscow, ID: Canon Press; 2010], p. 19

Jesus vs. Goliath (John 19:17-30)

John 19:17-30 parallels 18:13-27 in various ways, as seen also in John's neat chiastic arrangement (here). In 19:17-30 Jesus is taken from the Gentile "world" of Pilate's headquarters and back into the "land" near the city to be sacrificed on a cross, and eventually buried in a garden-tomb. Earlier in 18:13-27 Jesus was taken from the garden and sentenced to "die for the people" in that same land (v. 14). There in the land, Jesus declared that he had "spoken openly to the world" (v. 20), and in 19:17-30 Pilate writes an inscription above Jesus' cross for all to see, and he writes it in Aramaic, Latin, and Greek, the three dominant languages of the world. Last of all, John the author is present in the background of both scenes, labeled as "the disciple" (18:15 & 19:26-27). In chapter 18, John is the disciple "known to the high priest" and allowed to enter his house (v. 15), whereas in chapter 19 John is known by Jesus, the true High Priest of God, and adopted into the "temple-house of Jesus' Father."1 

The literary structure of 19:17-30 carries some interesting parallels as well. 

A)  Jesus carries his own cross (19:17)
   B)  The soldiers crucify Jesus, dividing two others, one man crucified on each side of him (19:18)
      C)  Pilate writes: "Jesus the Nazarene,2 the King of the Jews" (19:19)
         D)  Many Jews read the inscription; the inscription was in Aramaic, Latin, and Greek (19:21)
      C')  Chief Priests of the Jews correct what Pilate wrote: "This man said, I am King of the Jews" (19:21-22)
   B')  When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they divided his garments, one for each soldier (19:23-24)
A')  Jesus dies on the cross He carried (19:25-30)

In verse 17 (section A) Jesus is taken by soldiers, carrying his own cross to a place called Golgotha, which in Greek means "Place of the Skull." One Hebrew variant of Golgotha is gulgolet (גלגלת), which also means "skull," and is used throughout the old testament to describe "heads" of Israelites taken into the inventory of God's people. There are, however, a handful of other intriguing uses of gulgolet in the old testament which illuminate the significance of this name and place. The Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains lists three occurrences especially worth noting: Judges 9:53; II Kings 9:35; and I Chron. 10:10. 

In Judges 9:53, a woman crushes Abimelech's gulgolet with a millstone, both echoing and foreshadowing the seed of the woman (Christ) promised to crush the "skull" of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). In II Kings 9:35, Jehu storms into the courtyard of Jezreel to fulfill the word of Yahweh's curse against Jezebel, the king's daughter. In Hebew, Jezreel means "that which God planted." There, where Yahweh had planted a wicked queen over Israel to chasten His people, Jehu would come to uproot both the fruit and the root of Israel's idolatry. Where the house of Ahab sowed seeds of wickedness, Israel's Queen would be trampled down by Jehu, leaving behind only her gulgolet, feet, and hands. By coming to crush the skull of Jezebel, Jehu foreshadows one aspect of Christ's work, by crushing a type of seductive harlot-bride, the King's daughter and persecutor of Yahweh's covenant people, as unveiled by Jesus to John (Rev. 2:18-29). 

Finally, in I Chronicles 10:10 we find the Philistines taking the gulgolet of King Saul and bringing it to their central city of worship and into the temple of Dagon. That event echoed King David's triumph over the Philistine giant, Goliath of Gath, whose gulgolet was cut off and taken near the city of Jerusalem (I Sam. 17:51-54). There, where the skull of Goliath of Gath was placed, is where Jesus was crucified: Gol-Gath-a. In the place where King David brought the crushed skull of the giant, there Jesus, the son of David, King of Israel, crushed the skull of the serpent. But John tells the story of skull-crushing a bit different than one might expect. In first Samuel, David carries his victory trophy while Yahweh scatters his enemies. In John's gospel, this section (19:17-30) begins with Jesus carrying his own cross to Golgotha, the "Place of the Skull," and he ends with Jesus on the cross he carried. Like David, Jesus also carries his victory trophy as the Father scatters his enemies, but unlike David, Jesus becomes the trophy lifted up for all the world to see.  His cross is the means of becoming lifted up, drawing all nations unto himself. As Jesus told Nicodemus at night, the Son of man must be lifted up so that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life (John 3:14). Even during the day, within the temple, Jesus proclaimed the same message, saying "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me" (8:28). And in case John wasn't clear enough in that passage, describing the necessity of being lifted up on a cross, it was before Jesus' arrest in the garden that He cried out one last time: "When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all people to myself." But then John adds, "He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die" (12:32-33). 

In John 19:17-30, Jesus is hung on a tree, cursed of God, crushed for our iniquities. But in dying, the sins of the world are crushed with Him.  When both the "Head" and "Body" are crushed, the Spirit of God raises up a new body, a glorified Body, and they --being one with Him-- crush the head of the serpent. It is through the work of the cross that Satan's head is crushed and Jesus achieves victory, as promised in Genesis 3:15. It is through the resurrection of Jesus Christ and our union with His resurrected life that new creation begins, light overcomes darkness, and the powers of evil are destroyed.

1.  Peter J. Leithart, "We Saw His Glory" Implications of the Sanctuary Christology in John's Gospel, (published in Christology Ancient & Modern: Explorations in Constructive Dogmatics; Oliver D. Crisp and Fred Sanders, Editors) p. 128

2.  Peter Leithart makes this interesting remark about the inscription of Pilate: "Pilate's inscription on the cross identifies Jesus not as a but the Nazarene (John 19:19). In John, Nazareth is barely mentioned (cf. 1:45-46), and in John's view Pilate's titlon likely alludes not to Jesus' hometown but to Isaiah 11's prediction of a Messianic Branch (neser) from the stump of Jesse. Pilate's declaration means: "Jesus the Branch, King of the Jews." Qumran texts link Isaiah's Branch to the temple-building Branch (semah) of Zechariah 6:12: "Behold the man whose name is the Branch." Neser and semah are synonymous titles for the Messianic King who will build the eschatological temple. With his famous Ecce homo, Pilate quotes the first half of Zechariah 6:12 as he presents Jesus to the Jews, and then by putting "Nazarene" in the titlon he finishes the sentence and names Jesus as the Messianic temple-builder, a new Solomon." Ibid., p. 127. 

The Center of Matthew's Gospel (Matthew 13 & it's literary structure)

Continuing where I left off in this series of Matthew's Gospel, we finally arrive at the center of the book: chapter thirteen. As usual, with the way I prefer approaching each section of the Bible, identifying the literary structure is very important. It's not crucial or absolutely essential to a proper interpretation of every section, but it's extremely valuable to identify nonetheless. But chapter thirteen poses a few dilemmas in this regard. Some aspects of the structure are obvious, but because of multiple overlapping layers, it's difficult to reduce the overall structure to something simple.

At first glance, what is most obvious about chapter thirteen is that it's one of the five "pillar" discourses of Matthew's gospel, and it clearly begins at verse 1 and ends at verse 52. Verse 53 begins a new section with the literary marker, "and when Jesus had finished...", as found at the end of each of the five "pillars" of Matthew's gospel. 

A second glance will show that chapter 13 consists entirely of parables and explanations about parables. There are seven parables about the "Kingdom of Heaven" and an eighth parable addressed to the twelve apostles about scribes being trained for the "Kingdom of Heaven."

A few more glances will show similarities between parables. For example, the first parable (the parable of the sower) is presented and explained later on. The same is true for the "parable of the tares." That too is presented and then followed by a detailed explanation. Also, between these two parables (the parable of the sower with it's explanation and the parable of the tares with its explanation), there are two quotations from the old testament Scriptures in reference to "fulfillment." Even a cursory glance at the way modern bibles often subdivide each chapter into smaller sections will make this appear very obvious. This arrangement certainly seems intentional on Matthew's part. But that's not all. There are also a handful of very brief parables, sharing similarities between them. The third and fourth parables, the parable of the mustard seed and the parable of the leaven, are similar in meaning to each other. The fifth and sixth parables (of hidden treasure and a merchant who finds a pearl of great value) are both similar in meaning to each other. 

Below are a number of ways in which this structure can be laid out pictorially. Davies & Allison structure chapter 13 in three sections of three (as seen below)1:

13:1-9            Parable of the sower
13:10-17        Discussion of parables (+ scriptural allusion)
13:18-23        Interpretation of the sower

13:24-30        Parable of the tares
13:31-32        Parable of the mustard seed
13:33             Parable of the leaven
13:34-35        Discussion of parables (+ scriptural citation)
13:36-43        Interpretation of the tares

13:44             Parable of the treasure
13:45-46        Parable of the pearl
13:47-48        Parable of the net
13:49-50        Interpretation of the net
13:51-52        Discussion of parables (saying on treasure)


R.T. France attempts to lay the structure out somewhat chiastically2:

1-3a      Teaching by the lake
      3b-9      Opening parable: the sower
            10-17      About teaching in parables
            18-23      Explanation of the sower
      24-33      Three further parables of growth (weeds, mustard seed, leaven)
            34-35      About teaching in parables
            36-43      Explanation of the weeds
      44-50      Three further short parables (treasure, pearl, net)
      51-52      Concluding parable: the householder
53      Moving on

In my own attempt to outline the structure of chapter thirteen, I came up with three potential layouts, the first of which is very similar to France's chiastic outline above, and the last of which is similar to the triadic outline of Davies & Allison. Perhaps most important aspect worth noting about each of my outlines  (below) is the three fold division & progression of sowing, cultivating, and harvesting. That, to me, seems to be the logical progression of each triad of parables. 

Layout #1

A)  Teaching many things in parables (vv. 1-3a)

     

     B1)  Parable of The Sower, sowing the word of the kingdom (vv. 3b-9)

            C1)  Understanding parables (vv. 10-17)

            C2)  Parable explained (vv. 18-23)

     B2)  Three parables of cultivating the Kingdom (vv. 24-33)

            C1’)  Understanding parables (vv. 34-35)

            C2’)  Parables explained (vv. 36-43)

     B3)  Three parables about harvesting the Kingdom (vv. 44-50)

A’)  Understanding all these things in a parable (vv. 51-52)

Layout #2

A1)  Parable of The Sower, sowing the word of the kingdom (vv. 1-9)

      B1)  Understanding parables (vv. 10-17)

            C1)  Parable explained (vv. 18-23)

A2)  Three parables of cultivating the Kingdom (vv. 24-33)

      B2)  Understanding parables (vv. 34-35)

            C2)  Parables explained (vv. 36-43)

A3)  Three parables about harvesting the Kingdom (vv. 44-48)

            C3)  Parables explained (vv. 49-50)

      B3)  Understanding parables (vv. 51-52)

Layout #3

A1)  Parable of The Sower, sowing the word of the kingdom (vv. 1-9)

      B)  Understanding parables (vv. 10-17)

A1’)  Parable explained (vv. 18-23)

A2)  Three parables of cultivating the Kingdom (vv. 24-33)

      C)  Understanding parables (vv. 34-35)

A2’)  Parables explained (vv. 36-43)

A3)  Three parables about harvesting the Kingdom (vv. 44-48)

      D)  Parables explained (vv. 49-50)

A3’)  Understanding parables (vv. 51-52)

1.  W.D. Davies and D.C. Allison, International Critical Commentary: Matthew 8-18 (vol. 2) [New York, NY: T&T Clark, 1991] p. 371

2.  R.T. France, New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Matthew [Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; 2007] p. 501