Sermon Tone Analysis

Machine assisted translation of sermon in Icelandic

Collect prayer

Lord God, Heavenly Father, You who richly bless our work and give us our daily bread.

We pray, protect us from all greed, and awaken our hearts, so that we willingly share your blessing with those who have less.

Grant that we may prove to be faithful stewards of your gifts, and that we may enjoy your grace when you release us from our stewardship, and we come before your judgment, through your beloved son, Jesus Christ, our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one true God forever and ever.

Scripture readings

First reading is from Deuteronomy, chapter 8, verses 7-18:

L: This is the Holy Word.

C: Thanks be to God

L: Second reading is from 1 Corinthians, 3:10-15

L: This is the Holy Word.

C: Glory to you Lord, for you have the words of eternal life.

To whom else whall we go?

The Gospel

‌P: The gospel is written by the evangelist Matthew

C: God be praised for his joyful message

P: This is the Holy Gospel

C: Christ be praised

Sermon

The New Testament contains many of Jesus' parables, and it is not at all uncommon that we are given the key to the story if we only pay attention to it.

In this case, as so often, the parable is about the kingdom of heaven.

As Jesus himself says: "So is the kingdom of heaven, as a man who came from the earth."

We should keep this in mind when we read or hear the parable.

We are told about four characters.

First of all, it is a very wealthy man, the master—as he is called—who plans to leave the country.

Secondly, there are his servants, and they are of two kinds: On the one hand, good and faithful servants, and on the other hand, an evil and lazy servant.

Let's look at these characters that the parable tells us about.

I: What kind of man is this?

First there is this master, a very rich man who is going to leave the country.

Of course, we could start by asking: Why is he leaving the country?

But the parable does not answer that.

It's simply not that important, but the consequence is important: Something needs to be done about his assets while he's abroad.

Therefore, before he leaves, he calls his servants to him and leaves them with his property.

Perhaps it would have been even better to say that he entursted them with it, evidently with the view that they should manage it for him; use it well and fruitfully.

And the trust he has in the servants is great, because the possessions are great.‌

Talenta, an ancient unit of weight, is the unit of measure that expresses its value to us.

In the Old Testament it is first mentioned in connection with the tabernacle of the temple.

There the seven-branched lampstand was to be made of one talent of pure gold (Exo 25:39).

Often when great riches are mentioned in the Bible, they are precisely measured in talents.

Usually it was gold or silver that was measured in this unit, but it could also be brass or even iron (Exo 38, 2 Sam 12:30, 1 Kings 10:10, 1 Chr 29:7).

Ancient weighing stones found with the talent inscription indicate that it was around 30 kg in Israel, but there was also a heavier version of around 60 kg.

There is therefore clear that this is a great fortune.

It applies not only to the servant whom the master trusted with ten talents, but also to the servant whom he trusted with one talent.

The conclusion is this: First, all three servants are highly trusted, even the one who received the least.

This cannot be taken to mean that one servant was trusted with great wealth, while the other was trusted with little.

Everyone got a lot of wealth.

This one talent would probably have been somewhere around 150 million in today's Icelandic currency.‌

Second, it was neither chance nor varying degrees of trust that governed who was entrusted with the most and who with the least.

On the contrary, it was care for the servants, because he distributed his wealth according to the ability of each one.

It shows not only that he knew what he was doing, but also that he knew his servants well.

We should not understand the disparity as unjust discrimination, comradery or anything like that, but as his love for the servants.

For he distributed his possessions according to their ability, and according to the fact that they were not all the same.‌

Of course, it is not easy for a modern Icelander to accept this.

We are so determined that everyone should be the same, that we cannot even bear that God has created us so that we are born either male or female.

Everyone should go through the same processes, and the same schooling, even if it is obviously not suitable for everyone.

We prefer everyone to be exactly the same, even if we talk big about diversity.

But the master was not like that.

He took into account that the servants were not the same, and divided his belongings accordingly.

After that, he leaves the country and stays there for a long time.

Now the story turns to the servants.

‌II: Two kinds of servants

There are three servants, but only of two kinds.

Namely, the first two servants behave exactly the same.

Both take their role, and the trust they enjoy, very seriously.

Similarly, their behavior indicates that not only does their master trust them, but they also have a lot of trust in him.

He has given them the wealth to use them and grow them, and they are not afraid to do just that.

They are obviously shrewd, but equally fearless when doing commerce and investing.

Both quickly double what they have been entrusted with.

When the master returns and gives the accounts, he praises both of these servants with the same words: "Good, good and faithful servant.

Over a little you were faithful, over much I will put you.

Enter your lord's joy."

No doubt both could have done better.

They were probably lazy or discouraged at times and missed good opportunities.

However, this is not discussed.

Had they themselves mentioned it, he would have answered them something like this: "Yes, I know very well that you were sometimes discouraged and lazy.

Good, you good and faithful servant...” But if so, why does the third servant fare so ill?

Let's look at him too.

It's not like the third server doesn't do enough.

He does nothing.

He buries the riches in the ground and continues as if nothing happened.

He acts as if he was not entrusted with anything.

And what's more, he also explains to us the reason: Namely, he doesn't think much of the master.

We read verses 24 and 25 again:

The third servant buried the treasure and pretended that it simply did not exist: as if he had not been trusted with anything.

And the reason for that was not that he thought the wealth was too small, but that he did not want to recognize the master.

He thought the master was mean and unfair.

He lays a certain blame on the master and says that it is because of this fault that he was afraid and hid the talent.

In other words, it can be said this way: The third servant felt that he had a very good reason to ignore the master and not bother with either the wealth or the role he had been given.

It was all the master's own fault.

Let's take a closer look at the allegation.

III: Was the third servant right?

‌The accusation is actually one single thing, said two times, but in different words.

The servant accuses the master of appropriating a harvest where he has contributed nothing.

He reaps even though he did not sow.

He gathers the grain, though he has not scattered the seed.

This is a kind of Hebrew repetition: the same thing said twice with different words.

Perhaps the servant thought it unfair that the work of the servants makes the master even richer.

Or maybe he's accusing him of outright criminality.

Perhaps this master was then unpopular as a result.

It is proably not vital to the parable how this detail is understood, but at least the servant says that he was afraid because of this, and therefore hid the wealth.