Jesus’s Parable of the Soils (Matt. 13; Luke 8) requires us to move beyond a simple “believe or reject” framework and see how one seed—the Word of God—meets different types of hearts and degrees of receptivity. Each soil-type reflects both outward circumstances (rockiness, competing weeds, moisture) and inward conditions (openness, root-depth, perseverance). Taken together, they teach that while genuine spiritual life can begin under imperfect conditions, only a heart that’s carefully tended will bring its fruit to full maturity.
By mapping each soil to a distinct heart-condition and faith-quality, Jesus shows us that faith exists on a spectrum—from temporary joy to steadfast perseverance. Our task is twofold: to examine which soil best describes our own hearts and to cultivate the conditions (depth, vigilance, openness) that allow God’s Word to bear lasting fruit.
As we think about this paradigm, we can expand on the picture to include additional variations of human experience and interaction with the grace of God. For though there are only two possible outcomes regarding the question of a man’s final destiny, I would say that there are at least seven different paths he might travel to get there.
HE MAY OBTAIN ETERNAL LIFE because he:
The Synod of Dort: Embracing Theological Complexity
Steven Wedgeworth’s article, “The Synod of Dort and the Complexities of Being Reformed,” offers a fascinating account of how the English delegates at Dort defended and preserved theological breadth in the Reformed Tradition by refusing to condemn every disputed position. Wedgeworth explains:
"One of the most striking achievements of the British at Dort is seen in what they were able to keep from being listed among the rejected errors. Initially a proposal had been made to reject as an error the teaching that the reprobate could attain a state of temporary justification. The British protested and were, amazingly, successful in keeping this position from being considered heretical. Their reasons for doing so are worth quoting in full:
“We ourselves think that this doctrine is contrary to Holy Scriptures, but whether it is expedient to condemn it in these our canons needs great deliberation. On the contrary, it would appear
"The British were concerned about the interest of the Lutheran churches because James I had explicitly instructed them not to give undue offense towards them. James still hoped for a future union between all Reformation churches. The British delegates even asked that the Lutherans not be excluded from the title “Reformed,” since, they argued, the Lutherans began the Reformation.
"This information is fascinating for a number of reasons. It shows the breadth of the Reformed tradition, at least according to the British, as well as their understanding of the function of the Canons of Dort. Obviously if the success of removing a rejection held value, then it was understood that positions which were neither promoted nor condemned were allowable to be held by Reformed ministers. The interest in the Lutheran churches also shows that the British did not desire to use their confessions to mark off the limits of the Christian Church. They instead only wanted to condemn clear error and the precise points under dispute at the time."
By omitting any formal anathema of temporary justification, Dort’s Canons affirmed that their sole purpose was to condemn explicit errors of the moment, thereby preserving legitimate diversity within the broader Reformed tradition.
As Reformed Christians today, we must exercise the same restraint, avoiding the condemnation of positions that would have placed Augustine, Luther, or even Calvin under ecclesiastical discipline. It may seem a tired exercise to wonder whether a great theologian of the past could join our own congregation—but I still believe it’s a question worth our earnest and humble reflection.
Matthew 18: The Unforgiving Servant
One passage the English divines at Dort almost certainly had in view is Matthew 18:21–35—Jesus’ parable of the unforgiving servant. Here it is in full:
"Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt."
"But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ So his fellow servant fell down at his feet and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done.
"Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. Should you not also have had forgiveness on your fellow servant, just as I had mercy on you?’ And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him. So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”
From this parable we draw four clear points:
We must ask: what is justification, if not the forgiveness of sins? Jesus shows us plainly that one who is forgiven can, through an unforgiving heart, forfeit that pardon. Thus, no man is to presume that his justified status is safe and secure apart from a true, sincere, and persevering faith.
Two Species of Calling: Calvin’s Concession
Some will argue that this interpretation departs from John Calvin, insisting that only the elect—those effectually called by the Spirit—can possess faith that truly justifies. Yet Calvin himself indicates a more complex reality. While he affirms in many places that the elect’s calling differs qualitatively, he also concedes elsewhere that non-elect hearers can experience genuine, Spirit-wrought illumination—if only for a season. Consider his comments on Matthew 22:14 (“Many are called, but few are chosen”):
“There are two species of calling: for there is a universal call, by which God, through the external preaching of the word, invites all men alike, even those for whom He designs it to be a savor of death and the ground of a severer condemnation. In addition to this, there is a special call, which—for the most part—God bestows on believers only, when by the internal illumination of the Spirit He causes the word preached to take deep root in their hearts. Sometimes, however, He communicates it also to those whom He enlightens only for a time, and whom afterwards, in just punishment for their ingratitude, He abandons and smites with greater blindness.”
—John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 3.24.8
Notice here that Calvin does not confine the special, inward, and effectual call exclusively to the elect. He plainly acknowledges that the non-elect may, at times, receive this deeper illumination, only to have it judicially withdrawn when their gratitude falters. In doing so, Calvin frees us to read Scripture more directly, recognizing that true and genuine receptions of saving grace can happen among those who ultimately fall away.
For this reason, I have argued that labels like “miracle faith” or “historical faith” can sometimes do more to protect later theological systems than to clarify Scripture itself. While I have no quarrel with precise theological terminology, these phrases do not appear in the biblical text; they were coined later to shore up predetermined doctrinal boundaries. Instead, the Bible speaks of “temporary faith” (believe for a while), “temporary conversion” (once enlightened), and “temporary justification” (I forgave you all that debt)—terms that better capture the experience of those who later fall away, echoing the language of the Scriptures.
Thus Calvin’s unvarnished words remind us that Scripture portrays faith as a spectrum of divine encounters: some genuine, some spurious; some that begin with promise and end in abandonment; some shallow and short-lived; and others deep and lasting to the end. All of these, of course, unfold according to God’s sovereign decree, for He alone ordains every stage and every variation of human experience in our encounter with Christ and the Gospel of His grace.
- Hard Ground No reception; the seed is snatched away.
Here the soil is hard and inhospitable, just as a hardened heart offers no room for the word of Christ. The message never penetrates; Satan immediately removes it before any response can take place. This soil warns us that hearing alone, without willingness to receive, leaves us with a dead and barren heart. Jesus says: “The devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.” - Rocky Soil Temporary reception; initial faith and joy.
In this case, the seed is planted in shallow soil and springs up at once. The believer experiences faith, joy, and even initial growth, yet lacks the deep roots needed to withstand trials. When affliction or persecution comes, that shallow root cannot hold, and this temporary faith withers under pressure. Jesus says: “These believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.” - Thorny Ground Genuine growth, early production of fruit.
Unlike the rocky soil, here the seed is received, takes firm root, and begins to produce good fruit—tender shoots, fresh buds, and early signs of a harvest. However, the thorns—worldly cares, material pleasures, and unconfessed sin—grow alongside the crop, eventually choking out it. The result is a new life that began well but never reached its intended goal. Jesus says: “these bring no fruit to perfection.” - Good Soil Deep, well-tended ground; enduring growth and lasting fruit.
This represents the heart that is both receptive and disciplined. It is free from the stones of shallow faith and the weeds of worldliness and temptation. The seed takes deep hold, draws from both moisture and nutrients, and survives every season—bringing forth a hundred, sixty, or thirty-fold harvest. True discipleship, then, is not merely about receiving the Word, but continuing in it. “Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.” (Jn. 8:31)
By mapping each soil to a distinct heart-condition and faith-quality, Jesus shows us that faith exists on a spectrum—from temporary joy to steadfast perseverance. Our task is twofold: to examine which soil best describes our own hearts and to cultivate the conditions (depth, vigilance, openness) that allow God’s Word to bear lasting fruit.
As we think about this paradigm, we can expand on the picture to include additional variations of human experience and interaction with the grace of God. For though there are only two possible outcomes regarding the question of a man’s final destiny, I would say that there are at least seven different paths he might travel to get there.
HE MAY OBTAIN ETERNAL LIFE because he:
- Hears the Gospel, believes it, and never falls away, “Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come… to test those who dwell on the earth.” (Rev. 3:10)
- Hears the Gospel, believes it, falls away, but repents again, “But he was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.” (Lk. 15:32)
- Hears the Gospel, rejects it, later repents, and then perseveres to the end, (variation of 1 and 2).
HE MAY PERISH IN HIS SINS because he: - Never hears the Gospel, “How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard?” (Rom. 10:14)
- Hears the Gospel but rejects it and never repents, “Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, ‘It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it…’” (Acts 13:46)
- Hears the Gospel, pretends to believe (hypocrisy), never truly repents, and so ultimately perishes, “But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not.” (Jn. 6:64)
- Hears the Gospel, believes it for a time, but falls away, “Those on the rock are the ones who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; but these have no root… and they believe for a while. But when tribulation or persecution arises… they fall away.” (Lk. 8:13)
The Synod of Dort: Embracing Theological Complexity
Steven Wedgeworth’s article, “The Synod of Dort and the Complexities of Being Reformed,” offers a fascinating account of how the English delegates at Dort defended and preserved theological breadth in the Reformed Tradition by refusing to condemn every disputed position. Wedgeworth explains:
"One of the most striking achievements of the British at Dort is seen in what they were able to keep from being listed among the rejected errors. Initially a proposal had been made to reject as an error the teaching that the reprobate could attain a state of temporary justification. The British protested and were, amazingly, successful in keeping this position from being considered heretical. Their reasons for doing so are worth quoting in full:
“We ourselves think that this doctrine is contrary to Holy Scriptures, but whether it is expedient to condemn it in these our canons needs great deliberation. On the contrary, it would appear
- “That Augustine, Prosper and the other Fathers who propounded the doctrine of absolute predestination and who opposed the Pelagians, seem to have conceded that certain of those who are not predestinated can attain the state of regeneration and justification. Indeed, they use this very argument as an illustration of the deep mystery of predestination; which cannot be unknown to those who have even a modest acquaintance with their writings.
- “That we ought not without grave cause to give offence to the Lutheran churches, who in this matter, it is clear, think differently.
- “That (which is of greater significance) in the Reformed churches themselves, many learned and saintly men who are at one with us in defending absolute predestination, nevertheless think that certain of those who are truly regenerated and justified, are able to fall from that state and to perish and that this happens eventually to all those, whom God has not ordained in the decree of election infallibly to eternal life. Finally we cannot deny that there are some places in Scripture which apparently support this opinion, and which have persuaded learned and pious men, not without great probability.”
"The British were concerned about the interest of the Lutheran churches because James I had explicitly instructed them not to give undue offense towards them. James still hoped for a future union between all Reformation churches. The British delegates even asked that the Lutherans not be excluded from the title “Reformed,” since, they argued, the Lutherans began the Reformation.
"This information is fascinating for a number of reasons. It shows the breadth of the Reformed tradition, at least according to the British, as well as their understanding of the function of the Canons of Dort. Obviously if the success of removing a rejection held value, then it was understood that positions which were neither promoted nor condemned were allowable to be held by Reformed ministers. The interest in the Lutheran churches also shows that the British did not desire to use their confessions to mark off the limits of the Christian Church. They instead only wanted to condemn clear error and the precise points under dispute at the time."
By omitting any formal anathema of temporary justification, Dort’s Canons affirmed that their sole purpose was to condemn explicit errors of the moment, thereby preserving legitimate diversity within the broader Reformed tradition.
As Reformed Christians today, we must exercise the same restraint, avoiding the condemnation of positions that would have placed Augustine, Luther, or even Calvin under ecclesiastical discipline. It may seem a tired exercise to wonder whether a great theologian of the past could join our own congregation—but I still believe it’s a question worth our earnest and humble reflection.
Matthew 18: The Unforgiving Servant
One passage the English divines at Dort almost certainly had in view is Matthew 18:21–35—Jesus’ parable of the unforgiving servant. Here it is in full:
"Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt."
"But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ So his fellow servant fell down at his feet and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done.
"Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. Should you not also have had forgiveness on your fellow servant, just as I had mercy on you?’ And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him. So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”
From this parable we draw four clear points:
- Peter is speaking as a forgiven—and therefore justified—man. He approaches Jesus from the standpoint of one already saved by faith in Christ (cf. Matt. 16:13–20), asking how many times he must extend forgiveness to others.
- Jesus represents Peter by the forgiven servant. The debtor who pleads, “Master, have patience with me,” and then receives full cancellation of his ten-thousand-talents debt mirrors Peter’s own justified status.
- Refusal to forgive reverses one’s own forgiveness. Because the servant refused to grant others the forgiveness he himself received, the Master reinstated his debt, cast him into prison until the whole debt be paid.
- Jesus concludes with a direct, unambiguous application. “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.” This warning is addressed personally to Peter—and, by extension, to the other apostles and every believer in Jesus.
We must ask: what is justification, if not the forgiveness of sins? Jesus shows us plainly that one who is forgiven can, through an unforgiving heart, forfeit that pardon. Thus, no man is to presume that his justified status is safe and secure apart from a true, sincere, and persevering faith.
Two Species of Calling: Calvin’s Concession
Some will argue that this interpretation departs from John Calvin, insisting that only the elect—those effectually called by the Spirit—can possess faith that truly justifies. Yet Calvin himself indicates a more complex reality. While he affirms in many places that the elect’s calling differs qualitatively, he also concedes elsewhere that non-elect hearers can experience genuine, Spirit-wrought illumination—if only for a season. Consider his comments on Matthew 22:14 (“Many are called, but few are chosen”):
“There are two species of calling: for there is a universal call, by which God, through the external preaching of the word, invites all men alike, even those for whom He designs it to be a savor of death and the ground of a severer condemnation. In addition to this, there is a special call, which—for the most part—God bestows on believers only, when by the internal illumination of the Spirit He causes the word preached to take deep root in their hearts. Sometimes, however, He communicates it also to those whom He enlightens only for a time, and whom afterwards, in just punishment for their ingratitude, He abandons and smites with greater blindness.”
—John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 3.24.8
Notice here that Calvin does not confine the special, inward, and effectual call exclusively to the elect. He plainly acknowledges that the non-elect may, at times, receive this deeper illumination, only to have it judicially withdrawn when their gratitude falters. In doing so, Calvin frees us to read Scripture more directly, recognizing that true and genuine receptions of saving grace can happen among those who ultimately fall away.
For this reason, I have argued that labels like “miracle faith” or “historical faith” can sometimes do more to protect later theological systems than to clarify Scripture itself. While I have no quarrel with precise theological terminology, these phrases do not appear in the biblical text; they were coined later to shore up predetermined doctrinal boundaries. Instead, the Bible speaks of “temporary faith” (believe for a while), “temporary conversion” (once enlightened), and “temporary justification” (I forgave you all that debt)—terms that better capture the experience of those who later fall away, echoing the language of the Scriptures.
Thus Calvin’s unvarnished words remind us that Scripture portrays faith as a spectrum of divine encounters: some genuine, some spurious; some that begin with promise and end in abandonment; some shallow and short-lived; and others deep and lasting to the end. All of these, of course, unfold according to God’s sovereign decree, for He alone ordains every stage and every variation of human experience in our encounter with Christ and the Gospel of His grace.
Recent
Archive
2026
February
April
2025