_”Win the winnable, while they are winnable,”_ is a missiological Great Commission, grounded in the theological sanction of the “Parable of the Sower.” The message of this parable is clear: a sensible sower would not waste seed by casting it on the path, the rocks, or among the thorns. Rather, it is the good soil that yields sixtyfold and a hundredfold, as appreciated in the parable.
Since we agree that a sensible sower would not deliberately sow seeds in unfruitful places, we must understand that the Lord is not suggesting anyone would purposely sow on the path or among the thorns. What’s implicit in this parable is that the good soil is “already prepared” by someone—most likely the sower himself. Without preparation, it wouldn’t make sense to go to the field at all.
The verbs “sow” and “fell” in the parable deserve careful attention. Although the parable mentions that some seeds fell on the wayside, some on the rock, and some among the thorns, it also notes that “others” fell on the good soil. This suggests the sower’s intention was to sow all the seeds on the good soil, which had been carefully prepared for this purpose. Of course I know that I cannot create my own exegesis on this topic merely imposing my own meaning on these two words ‘sow’ and ‘fell’.
Importantly, this is a parable, requiring interpretation as the Lord Himself explained privately to His disciples. We should not take it literally, even though the parable emphasizes the soil over the sower. If we assume only receptive people deserve attention, then who will prepare the other grounds to become good soil?
We see a reflection of this idea in the Genesis story. While God provided food for Adam, Adam still had the responsibility to care for the Garden. Eden would not have yielded its fruit without Adam’s care, which he likely performed joyfully, knowing that idleness is unsustainable. After the fall, though the land was cursed and Adam had to toil for his food, God never provided “instant” good soil. Humanity has always had to toil to prepare the land before sowing, and we cannot expect a parable to explain every detail of this process.
Another point to consider is that the “path” in the parable likely refers to a compacted passage within the field, where people have walked repeatedly. Similarly, the rocks and thorns could represent prepared but neglected land, rather than uncultivable areas. In hilly regions, we can often see small rock beds interspersed with good soil. In the context of missions in India, who will toil to prepare the ground among people groups considered “unwinnable”?
Many times, when we prepare good soil, the rocks and thorns removed from it are thrown into neglected fields. Farmers typically prepare all the fields they plan to cultivate before sowing, but due to limited resources like water, manure, or labor, they may be forced to abandon some areas. They may also cast the removed rocks and thorns into these neglected but still somewhat prepared fields, where they can no longer pay attention.
This pattern can be seen in the history of missions in India. High-caste, educated people became the “path” that missionaries walked upon, carrying seeds to sow in more responsive fields among the tribes. In this process, the rocks and thorns were naturally cast into neglected but somewhat prepared fields. It is human nature to expect results from one’s labor. Missionaries, seeing fruitful harvests among the tribes, became satisfied with those fields and justified their focus through self-created “winning” formulas.
While we acknowledge the importance of focusing on receptive groups, we must also recognize two facts. First, any ground that is properly prepared will yield results. Second, the sower must be provided with adequate resources for farming so that no field he prepares is neglected.
Some soil may require more labor to prepare for sowing. Anyone seeking quick crops for survival may not pay attention to these difficult fields. However, those aiming to provide for others should toil in these neglected fields, resulting in a bumper harvest to store in the granary, ensuring provision during times of famine.
The “winning” formula may help reap quick harvests for the church’s survival in India. However, if we want to become true suppliers, someone must toil to prepare the hard grounds, ensuring a bumper harvest to fill the godowns. It is often said that the final chapter of church history cannot be written unless India is won for the Lord. This becomes evident when we consider that no proper theology can emerge if educated and high-caste people are continually neglected. If “win the winnable” remains a missiological principle, then the question, “Why do others remain unwinnable?” will become a theological challenge requiring answers from the same missiologists.
Post Script:
I wrote this back in 1996, but much of my understanding has undergone a radical transformation, especially in relation to my bhakti and seva for the Lord. However, the core issue remains the same. When aggressive evangelism failed miserably, a so-called ‘dialogue’ approach emerged. Yet, as time has shown, this too often amounted to little more than Christian intellectual entertainment. Despite sincere efforts, such as those outlined by Clooney in his book The Future of Hindu-Christian Studies1 , the reality is that, after confronting ‘Resistant Hinduism’2—where the ‘ Bible trubles’3—most mission efforts have shifted into ‘protection mode’ for survival, all while holding onto their mission agenda.
In this evolving landscape, even the once arrogant mission language like ‘winning souls’ has vanished. Promoting the righteousness of the Lord among the so-called high caste has taken a backseat, with no clear direction on how to engage them. Despite their efforts, missions often find themselves back at square one.
So what’s the solution? I won’t claim ignorance. I know one thing for certain: regeneration never follows reformation. Reformation is merely a byproduct of regeneration, not a tool to achieve it. But how and by whom this regeneration can be realized cannot be answered by a single mind; it requires the involvement of those who take their bhakti seriously.
Dayanand Bharati
[Lucknow, January 7, 1996] Revised 24-9-2024, Gurukulam
1 Francis X. Clooney, SJ, The Future of Hindu-Christian Studies: A Theological Inquiry, New York, Routledge, 2017
2 Richard Fox Young, Resistant Hinduism :Sanskrit Sources On Anti-Christian Apologetics in Early Nineteenth-Century India, by Vienna, 1981 (Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi)
3 R.F. Young and S. Jebanesan, THE BIBLE TREMBLED: THE HINDU-CHRISTIAN CONTROVERSIES OF NINETEENT-CENTURY CEYLON, Vienna 1995. Publications of the De Nobili Research Library, Edited by Gerhard Oberhammer, Institute of Indology, University of Vienna, Volume XXII
Leave a Reply