Matthew 21, Part 5
Notes
Transcript
The Chief Priests and Elders have just questioned Jesus’ authority while He was teaching in the temple. Who gave you permission to teach and preach like you do? The people accepted Jesus as the “prophet from Nazareth in Galilee”
11 And the crowds said, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee.”
The same way the acknowledged John the Baptist as a prophet. The Chief Priests and Elders were not asking “who gave you permission” because they were truly interested in knowing, but were questioning Jesus’ authority because they did not believe He was the Son of God. They were more concerned on asking Jesus to say something that would give them an opportunity to persecute Him. Their questioning led to three parables.
Parable of Two Sons
Parable of Two Sons
28 “What do you think? A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’
29 And he answered, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he changed his mind and went.
30 And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go.
31 Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you.
32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. And even when you saw it, you did not afterward change your minds and believe him.
What do you think? Jesus asks the Pharisees opinion. Now, do you think this is because he doesn’t know the answer? No, it is to get them to think...
The first parable is about two sons who were instructed by their father to work in the vineyard. The first son refused to obey initially, but later changed his mind and went to do what his father instructed him to do. The second son agreed to work at first, but later changed his mind and did not do what his father instructed him to do. Jesus asked the priests and elders, “Which of the two did what his father wanted?”.
Both sons are not without guilt. The commands in the OT are clear about showing reverence to one’s parents (Lev 19:3),
3 Every one of you shall revere his mother and his father, and you shall keep my Sabbaths: I am the Lord your God.
which does not only include commands against mocking and cursing them (Exod 21:17; Lev 20:9; Prov 20:20; 30:11, 17), but also the requirement to follow their instructions.
Obedience is not limited to those instructions that pertain to one’s morals, but they also include commands about daily tasks. The first son’s initial refusal is nothing less than disrespect, and the second son’s agreeing to work and later not doing it is no different, in fact, worse. Even the religious leaders agree that the first son is the one who is truly obedient.
From Jesus’ explanation of the parable, it is clear that the first son represents the “tax collectors and prostitutes,” or “sinners,” in general, who may have initially said No to God, but when John came preaching the kingdom of God, they were the ones who responded positively to him. So Jesus said they are “entering the kingdom” before the religious leaders (Matt 21:31). The religious leaders, however, in an attempt to give an impression to the people that they had responded to John even though they refused to recognize his authority, said Yes, but actually refused to obey. By their earlier question to Jesus, it is also clear that they refused to acknowledge his authority. A second parable was told to address the question about his authority, Jesus told them another parable about the landowner who planted a vineyard and rented it to some farmers while he went on a trip.
Parable of Wicked Tenants
Parable of Wicked Tenants
33 “Hear another parable. There was a master of a house who planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a winepress in it and built a tower and leased it to tenants, and went into another country.
34 When the season for fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to get his fruit.
35 And the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and stoned another.
36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first. And they did the same to them.
37 Finally he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’
38 But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and have his inheritance.’
39 And they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
40 When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
41 They said to him, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.”
42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: “ ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?
43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.
44 And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.”
45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them.
46 And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet.
Towards the harvest season, the Master sent his servants to collect his share of the harvest, but the tenants beat one, killed another, and stoned the third one. This was then repeated until he decided to send his son, whom the wicked servants killed. The landowner then took the land and rented it to other tenants who gave him his share of the harvest .
The distinction Jesus made is not between Israel and the Gentiles, but between fruitless and fruitful people . The fruitless ones refer to the Pharisees who also reject the Stone, while the fruitful ones refer to those who do the opposite, whether Israelites or the Gentiles who come from the east or the west.
The prophet Isaiah also tells of a similar parable. Like the landowner in Jesus’ parable, the one in Isaiah also planted a vineyard with a wall, winepress and watchtower. Instead of producing good grapes, the vineyard produced bad ones. Isaiah explains that the vineyard represents the people of Israel and Judah, many of whom continue in their injustice and bloodshed, and acquire land through unrighteous means. The result of their sin is the desolation of their land. Moving back to the parable of Jesus, it is not difficult to see that the landowner in the story represents God who is entitled to receive his “share of the crop” and the son is Jesus. The description of the servants who were sent to collect the owner’s share fits the prophets who were sent before Jesus; some of whom were beaten like Jeremiah, some were killed like Elijah’s contemporaries, and others stoned to death like Zechariah. Several prophets were persecuted for delivering God’s message to his people. The way the Jewish leaders treated Jesus would be the same as the way they treated the earlier prophets.
The wicked tenants clearly refer to the religious leaders, and they understood that Jesus was talking about them . Interestingly, the priests during the time of Jesus were the few in Israel who owned lands, some of them having added “house to house” and joined “field to field”, yet in this parable they were the tenants. Justice would require that the wicked tenants be punished, and death is a reasonable consequence for their action. Yet the landowner did not seek justice in this way, but rather acted to “bring those wretches to their wretched end” and rent the land to “a people” who could produce fruit. The “wretches” who refuse to give the owner the fruits of the land and the “people” producing fruit are distinguished by their willingness to acknowledge the authority of the land owner, by giving him his due.
Jesus quoted again from Psalm 118, and this time, he referred to the Stone rejected by the builders. Unlike the crowd who received Jesus as king, the priests and elders rejected him as king. The political implication of Jesus’ claim could not be ignored. Either he was one of the messianic pretenders during his era, or he was the real king, and Caesar and the governor he appointed in Judea were the royal pretenders. Jesus’ claim could potentially create chaos in the city, and this was partly the reason the religious leaders tried to suppress Jesus, but the greater reason was explained by Matthew. They understood that they were the wicked tenants who refused to give the landowner his share of the harvest and the builders who rejected the Stone, so they started to plan how to get him arrested. However, they could not do anything drastic, and once again, it was because they were afraid of the people.