The Parable of the Wedding Banquet/Feast

Let us Pray!

Heavenly Father, the entrance of Your Word gives light! We ask that You will shine the light of Your Word into our hearts, so that it may be reflected in our lives and illuminate the world around us. Amen

The Purpose of Parables

The purpose of the parable is to serve as a commentary on the Scriptures, or as a commentary upon some principle that can be found in the Old Testament. It often draws upon Scriptural imagery or phraseology to make its point. In this case the purpose of the parable is to teach us something about the Kingdom of Heaven by the use of a short fictitious story.

Some experts regard Jesus parables to be among the earliest examples of the Rabbinic Parable, but I do not think that we should omit from consideration those of Solomon, although they are too early to be regarded as rabbinic.

It has been common place to read this parable as lesson about being ready and responsive to the call of God when it comes. Some have mistakenly taken it as a lesson in replacement theology, and the triumph of Christianity over Judaism. But the first Christians of the Apostolic Church portrayed themselves as good Jews, who were fulfilling the Hebrew Scriptures just like Jesus did.

This morning we are going to try and unpack this parable a little bit more, because there are signs that its message had a quite specific target.

How Do Parables Work?

Parables use something familiar to introduce something unfamiliar. They use that which can be seen to explain that which cannot be seen. In other words a parable is an earthly story with a heavenly meaning.

Whenever I read a parable, I look for the underlying message and the twist in the tale that is there to get our attention and stimulate discussion and interaction.

Another characteristic of the parable is a hint of humour, or as one writer put it, an element of the unexpected. A caricature that can be recognised as such, that helps the story communicate its message.

The majority of the parables that we know about were communicated in the Hebrew language.

Parables often work with stock metaphors: e.g. God as King, Israel as a son or bride, or a banquet representing the Age to Come, and they are often drawn from the Old Testament. Similar parables to this one are known to exist, but this is Jesus’ version according to Matthew.

I will not be contrasting this parable with a similar parables such the one in Luke 14:15-24. We will consider the parable in Matthew 22:1-14 on its own merits. A parable similar to this one was also told by Rabbi Johanan Ben Zakkai (RIBaZ) who was active around the middle of the first century [C L Blomberg, Interpreting Parables, 1990].

Who was Jesus Talking to?

It appears from the end of the previous chapter that Jesus was speaking to the chief-priests and the Pharisees who supported them. As we make our way through this parable, we will identify other indications that this is the case.

The followers of Shammai were inclined to be more strict than the Pharisees of the School of Hillel, and saw the Temple as their base of operations. Both the Chief Priests and Shammai come in for criticism in Jewish tradition, and the New Testament reflects broader Jewish perceptions regarding these influences in their midst. The Herod family is also regarded with similar disdain.

We should note that this parable is not directed at the irreligious, but at people who were considered by some to be prominent religious leaders. This is a reminder from Jesus that religious people should not become complacent, but should continue to strive to be pleasing to God.

The religious people in question had a reputation for being more interested in earthly riches than heavenly treasures. They lived in the here-and-now with no consideration for the here-after. They went through the motions of religion, but did not endeavour to live the light of God’s word. This sounds like a lesson that other could learn from.

A parallel account of this parable occurs in Luke 14:16-24. Lukes version contains variations not found in Matthew but we are going to stick to Matthew’s version today. I am of these opinion that these different versions were told on different occasions. Marriage is often used in the Bible as a metaphor for the relationship between God and his people in the Old Testament (Hosea 1:2-2:23; Jeremiah 2:1-4:4), and for the relationship between Christ and the Church in the New Testament (Matthew 9:14-15, 2 Corinthians 11:1-3, Ephesian 5:25-27, Revelation 19:7-9).

We know from the verses prior to this parable that Jesus is talking to the priests and pharisees, but there is something that narrows the target of this parable even more, and it is the twist in the tale. The house of Caiaphas was largely kept in power by pagan Rome and its supporters.

The high-priests of this time came under much criticism from the wider Jewish community, hence the criticism against them in the Gospels. For further insight into Jewish perceptions of the high-priesthood you can consult an English translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The opinions expressed there against the high-priests are not unique to the Essenes.

People can recognise sincerity and integrity when they see it, just as they can recognise insincerity.

What is the Kingdom of Heaven Like?

Matthew 22:1–2 NIV

Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son.

Jesus’ subject matter was controversial in and of itself. Last time I preached, we focussed upon the dangers of acknowledging political and religious power that was not somehow related to Rome. The Roman’s did not accept any political or religious rivals.

Judaism generally got a free pass as long as it continued to make prayers and sacrifices for the emperor at the Temple in Jerusalem. But, I think that there may have been some scope for misunderstanding in Jesus parables about the Kingdom of Heaven, which sounded like it was both political and religious to the Romans.

The Bible begins with a wedding in Genesis and ends with one in Revelation. I think that perhaps there is some significance to this as we consider our parable. The wedding is a time honoured symbol of the relationship between God and His people.

This Great Feast in the presence of the King is there to remind us of the End-times, but also seems to relate to the Passover Feast (Exodus 12:19) at Jerusalem, and perhaps other sacred gatherings where the Temple had an important role.

This parable is the last in a set of three, all of which involve a reversal, and the idea of being ready when the call comes. They all amount to one thing: ‘Many are called, but few are chosen!’ You might see this parable as Jesus’ guide to being one of the chosen.

The Wedding Feast

By tradition a marriage feast could last for a week, and often did. The honoured guests were served first, and then others would follow. Sometimes there would be two invitations: one to inform the guests about the intended marriage and its feast, and the second to tell them that all was ready.

Some commentators are puzzled by the reference to a wedding garment which comes later in this parable, but if you were a priest or high-priest serving at the Palace (Temple) of the Great King, then this parable would quite pointed, since they all wore special garments, and could not enter without them.

The Hebrew word for temple could also mean palace, and this may have heightened the impact of this parable [הֵיכַל Heychal means temple and palace see BDB].

Another indirect reference to the Temple and its sacrifices is the mention of animals being killed, which we shall come to in due course.

He Sent His Servants

Matthew 22:3 NIV

He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.

Many interpreters of the parables compare the first invitation with the Old Testament prophets.

The people being called in the parable would have already received and accepted the initial invitation, but when it came to crunch time they decided not to attend.

An invitation from a king was a high honour, but the intended guests were not treating it as such. They treated the invitation, the messengers, and the king with disdain.

In many ways the priests, and especially the chief priests, were regarded as the inner circle within the Palace of the King, which was the Temple at Jerusalem.

In the parable the chief-priests are characterised as disrespectful guests who reject their king, his servants, and his kind hospitality.

The Second Chance

Matthew 22:4–6 NIV

“Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.’ “But they paid no attention and went off—one to his field, another to his business. The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them.

The Word Commentary compares the second invitation to John the Baptist, the apostles, and perhaps we could also add the early Jewish Christian Community.

The reference to animals being butchered may help us to locate the target of this parable: i.e. the chief priests who killed sacrifices. The word that the NIV translates as ‘butchered’ can mean ‘to slaughter’ [θύω to sacrifice of slaughter; see Liddell Gk Lex], but often meant ‘to sacrifice’.

The king in this parable is patient and considerate and did not simply accept the situation, but attempted to correct it by sending more servants. Servants who knew that they might be rejected, because they had already been turned away.

Some of the intended guests were indifferent to their obligation, and others were extremely hostile. The parable presents the reactions of those who were invited as varying between apathy and outright opposition. This is a parable that portrays a group of honoured individuals who were living in treasonous rebellion against their king.

The king has done everything that he can to bring those who were invited into his presence and bring them closer to him. But they choose to withdraw and even try to humiliate him with a feast devoid of guests.

The Response to Rejection and Murder

Matthew 22:7 NIV

The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.

From the treatment that the offenders receive, it appears that they were city rulers and dignitaries, who felt themselves above the king. But they are punished for their disrespect to the king and their cruelty to his messengers.

Some have interpreted this part of the parable as a reference to the coming destruction of the Temple and of the city of Jerusalem. The destruction of Jerusalem in the first and second century would bring about the effective end of high-priestly power and the main functions of the Levitical priesthood. After the second destruction of Jerusalem, Pharisaic Judaism rose to the effective religious leadership of the Jewish people, and Jerusalem could no longer function as the centre and base of world Christianity.

The New Guests

Matthew 22:8–10 NIV

“Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. So go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.’ So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, the bad as well as the good, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.

The servants were sent to the exits [διεξόδους] out of the city to find new guests, calling people who were headed away to turn around. The matter was urgent because all was prepared, and so the food would spoil if there was any delay.

This parable is almost prophetic concerning the future growth of Christianity as those first Hebrew Christians spread the Gospel throughout its homeland in Israel and out into the wider world . Christianity would become known in the Roman empire as the religion of slaves and undesirables. The people rejected by the Jewish establishment and the Roman culture would become vital in establishing the Church as a force to be reconned with throughout the Roman Empire.

The people who thought that they were too important to attend symbolised the chief-priests and their supporters. The chief-priest were widely condemned in Jewish circles because they were too willing to collaborate with the Romans, and were responsible for the abuses of the Temple that Jesus and other religious leaders complained about.

Meanwhile the people who had no place in the Roman order or the Temple service would be welcomed into the kingdom. People who were considered sinners could find a place in the Kingdom through the compassion and generosity of the Great King.

The wedding in the parable became a banquet for all those who were considered least likely to be welcome on such an occasion. At this banquet those who were unimportant, excluded and outsiders would become the insiders, and honoured guests. They would replace those who had proven themselves to be unworthy by their behaviour.

The Ungrateful Guest

Matthew 22:11–13 NIV

“But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. He asked, ‘How did you get in here without wedding clothes, friend?’ The man was speechless. “Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

So far as we know, it was not customary for wedding garments to be provided to guests. However, we are not talking about a customary situation. But a situation where passers by are invited to a royal feast, and in this fictitious setting those who attend need to wear a wedding garment.

Perhaps we are dealing with a gate-crasher, or perhaps we are dealing with someone who thought they knew better, and that nobody would notice.

Revelation 19:7-9 might provide a clue. The garment may represent the righteousness of the saints, and their acts of compassion, or maybe I am just over-analysing. Others have suggested that the garment symbolised their state of preparedness and the idea of being in a constant state of readiness for the coming of the kingdom.

One thing I do know, the ungrateful guest was not showing due respect to the king. Just turning up as you are, without regard for the requirements of the king is clearly not good enough, especially if the king has made prior arrangements so that you would be ready.

If this parable is about anything, it is about being ready to enter the presence of the king in the way that he has ordained.

If, the ungrateful guest represents the high-priest, as I suspect, then he is not among those originally invited, but he was among the people who were not supposed to be present. This was a major part of the objections against the high-priests during the Second Temple Period. They were not the people that God had chosen for the task, they had bought their way into power with money.

It is possible that the curious requirement of a special wedding garment was created to direct the parable specifically at the priests, and perhaps at the high-priest who needed to wear special white linen clothes to appear before God at the Temple.

According to the Law, these garments were provided for the priests and the high priest (Zepheniah 1:7-8, Exodus 28:39-42, 39:27-30; Leviticus 6:8-13, 16:1-5, 16:32; 1 Samuel 2:18; 2 Chronicles 5:12).

The chief priests might be dressed in their priestly robes, but according to the parable they are not clothed in righteousness. They are improperly dressed.

Failure to show proper respect to an earthly king was ill-advised, but failing to show respect to the Great King (Matthew 5:35) was the ultimate folly.

I am sure that there are also lessons for us within this story.

Many are Called

Matthew 22:14 NIV

“For many are invited, but few are chosen.”

I think that these words are intended to draw our attention to the irony. None of the people who were expected came to the feast. The feast was only attended by those who were not expected.

It seems likely that the pointed Temple references to a king, the killing of animals, and a special garment, along with the severe punishment, provoked a great deal of heated discussion and anger. Jesus was not preaching for popularity. He was confronting impiety and corruption in the religious leadership of the time.

Matthew 7:21 NIV

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

What Does All This Mean?

Rabbi Jacob said: ‘This world is like a lobby before the world to come. Prepare yourself in the lobby that you may enter the banquet hall’ [Abot 4:16].

This parable comes to us with as much force today as it did to the religious communities in the first century. Religious communities can still fail and be judged, but they can also be forgiven and restored.

This parable presents us with an open invitation to all, where no-one is excluded. But it also includes a lesson for the complacent that we should not take the kindness and compassion of God for granted.

In our parable it was not the mighty or the wealthy who accepted the call and came into the presence of the King, but ordinary people of all kinds.

I pray that God will enable each one of us to respond to the call in the divinely appointed manner. As we receive the call to confess our sins, to accept Jesus, and faithfully serve God wherever we may be.

If God is calling you to serve him, then I hope that you will accept his call.

Jesus bid us all, “Come closer!” Come to him today! He invites us to his banquet. Let us not delay! Now is not the time to falter, nor the time to stray. Joyfully accept his calling. Enter while you may!

[A slightly abridged form of this sermon was preached at St Paul’s Efford Plymouth]