The Parable of the Marriage Feast is the next KoH parable that Matthew records. It can be found in Matthew chapter 22 verses 1-14. This parable seems similar to the previous parable because it reflects the Jew/Gentile relationship to salvation.

Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. And he sent out his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding feast, and they were unwilling to come. Again he sent out other slaves saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited, “Behold, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and my fattened livestock are all butchered and everything is ready; come to the wedding feast.”‘ But they paid no attention and went their way, one to his own farm, another to his business, and the rest seized his slaves and mistreated them and killed them. But the king was enraged, and he sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and set their city on fire. Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. Go therefore to the main highways, and as many as you find there, invite to the wedding feast.’ Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered together all they found, both evil and good; and the wedding hall was filled with dinner guests. But when the king came in to look over the dinner guests, he saw a man there who was not dressed in wedding clothes, and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without wedding clothes?’ And the man was speechless. Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ For many are called, but few are chosen.” – Matthew 22:1-14

First I’ll take a look at the characters, and try to match them up with their prospective roles.
1. King – God
2. King’s Son – Jesus
3. Official Guests – Jews
4. Street Guests (both evil and good) – Gentiles

There are two interesting things in this parable that deserve mentioning. First, we see that this a wedding feast put on for the son. So we know that Jesus’ first coming was the wedding feast that God put on for him. We also learn that the Jews were unwilling to go to the wedding feast, even to the point of murder. I think this closely reflects what happened to Jesus.

God then sent his messengers to gather the Gentiles for the wedding feast. Now here is the most interesting part. One of the Gentiles who came to the feast was not properly dressed. The king throws him in the “outer darkness.” Obviously this corresponds to salvation, but what Jesus says next is very intriguing – “for many are called, but few are chosen.”

So, what does it mean to be called if not chosen? I think this is actually a misleading translation. The word used there for “called” is the same word used before for “invite.” If we understand the word as invited (and within the context it should be invited) it makes perfect sense that many are invited, but few are chosen. Or if we keep it the word as “called” we need to realize that this is not salvation, but a call to accept the free gift of salvation.

This parable, as well as some of the previous KoH parables, seems to indicate that there is a wide calling, but only the elect will be saved. Those who are not elect, obviously show up to the “feast” unprepared.

Any thoughts?

The next parable in this series is the Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16). I have linked to the parable for those of you who are not familiar with it. For those of you who are, I will summarize it for you. The parable is about a landowner who hires some laborers to work in his vineyard (for one denarius). Throughout the day he find more people standing around in the city and tells them to go and work in his vineyard. At the end of the day he tells his foreman to call in the workers, to pay them what is due. The first to be paid had only worked for an hour and they received one denarius. It ends up that each man receives one denarius. When it comes to the men who have worked all day they expect to receive more and grumble when they discover they are only going to receive one denarius. They think it is unfair because they worked longer than the others. The landowner says,

“Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go, but I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious because I am generous?” – Matthew 20:13-15

As I read and reread this passage it amazed me how much this parable reflects what happened in history. It is my contention that the first workers represent Israel. The latter workers represent the Gentiles.

Jesus ends this parable saying, “So the last shall be first, and the first last.” (v.16) As we know, especially from Romans, Israel (the first of God’s people) has been cut off from the olive tree and the Christian Gentiles (the last of God’s people) have been grafted in. At the end of the age Israel will too be grafted in. So the last shall be first and the first shall be last.

There is also clear teaching that the Gentiles being saved would be a stumbling block to the Jews. Clearly this parable teaches the stumbling that will occur. On more than one occasion, Paul dealt with the fairness of Gentiles being saved.

Comparing this parable to the other KoH parables, I find a few similarities. The workers obviously represent the sons of the kingdom. The landowner is most likely Jesus (the son of God). The foreman is a new one for us. He may just be a part of the parable, but I think he probably represents the Angels. These same Angels are the ones who pulled the fish out of the sea and bundled the wheat to store them, etc.

I read a commentator who said that this parable teaches us that there are no levels of reward in Heaven. Because each worker receives the same wage, regardless of the amount of time he spent working. He also said that Luke 12:47-48 teaches that there are levels of punishment in Hell. I do not hold to a certain doctrine either way and am not willing to jump on board because of these two verses. Especially the parable, since I think the point of the parable is to teach about the Jew/Gentile relationship – not about levels of reward.

What do you all think?

Lew

We have finished up all of the KoH parables from Matthew 13. It is time to start our journey forward and look at the latter KoH parable found in Matthew. Our first stop is Matthew 18:21-35. I found this parable very interesting, hopefully you will agree.

Then Peter came and said to Him, “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.

“For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves. When he had begun to settle them, one who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. But since he did not have the means to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made. So the slave fell to the ground and prostrated himself before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me and I will repay you everything.’ And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt. But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and began to choke him, saying, ‘Pay back what you owe.’ So his fellow slave fell to the ground and began to plead with him, saying, ‘Have patience with me and I will repay you.’ But he was unwilling and went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed. So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened. Then summoning him, his lord said to him, ‘You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?’ And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him. My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.” – Matthew 18:21-35

I may be wrong, but this parable is probably a well known one. Obviously the king represents God (the Father). The first verse reminds me of what might happen at the end of the age. He wants to settle accounts. Although this interpretation is probably not necessary and might not be correct given the fact that the slave goes and does something after settling accounts (but that might just be a limitation of a parable too).

We see that the King is merciful and forgives the slaves debt when he begs for it. Probably an example of what Jesus did for the world on the cross. Just as Jesus died for the whole world, so will the king forgive the debt of his slaves (when they ask him to).

Then the slave goes and does something interesting. He goes and chokes another slave, one of his peers, for what was owed him. He even goes so far as to through the other slave in prison until he is given his money back. I have often heard it preached that it was a mere impossibility to be payed back at this point, because he was in prison and had no way of making money. I will assume this is true for the moment because it parallels what happens next.

Later the King hears of what the slave has done and hands the wicked slave over to the torturers until he can repay the king back for what is owed. It is interesting that the Kings punishment closely parallels the slaves punishment of his peer. Surely this wicked slave too would never be able to pay back the king what was owed. Thus, he would be tortured forever.

I do not think it is a stretch of the imagination to see that this is what happens in Hell. Jesus ends this parable saying that His Father will do the same “if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.”

I do not believe the wicked slave was a son of the kingdom. Sure, he asked to be forgiven of his debt, but I think it was merely because he was face to face with the king. In a way, it was already too late for him. Later, when the slave showed his true nature, the king showed him the true punishment. My theology does not permit me to say that this slave was saved, because he is obviously being tortured.

Question: As far as salvation is concerned, what happened when the king forgave the slaves debts?

I have some ideas, but I want to hear from you all first.

Lew

The Parable of the Dragnet is the last parable in chapter 13 of Matthew. Like the first parable in this chapter, it is also explained by Jesus.

“Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet cast into the sea, and gathering fish of every kind; and when it was filled, they drew it up on the beach; and they sat down and gathered the good fish into containers, but the bad they threw away.” – Matthew 13:47-48

Considering the context of the previous parables, this parable seems pretty obvious. The gathering of the fish is similar to the gathering of the wheat and tares. The good fish are stored in containers and the bad and thrown out, much like the wheat is stored in the barn and the tares are burned in the fire.

This is pretty much what Jesus explains: “So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous, and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” – Matthew 13:49-50

Since this parable is pretty much self-explanatory I will leave it there. It obviously fits in with the other parables and does not seem to throw any wrenches in the works. With that said, let us discuss what Jesus says after this parable – something I consider to be a little confusing.

“Have you understood all these things?” They said to Him, “Yes.” And Jesus said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has become a disciple of the kingdom of heaven is like a head of a household, who brings out of his treasure things new and old.” – Matthew 13:51-52

Jesus ends with another parable like statement. Based on what we have previous stated (part 3 & the comments in part 2), the kingdom of heaven is another term for the sons of the kingdom. I do not put much stock in the word “scribe” that Jesus uses. I think he probably just used it as a general word for anyone. If this is true, it seems to fit with the “Great Commission” – the scribe becomes a disciple of the Christian (thus becoming a Christian himself).

Jesus compares this scribe to the head of a household, who “brings out of his treasure things new and old.” This is probably the most confusing part of this parable. I find myself asking, what is the significance of these new and old things? The best explanation I can think of is that this is similar to what we see in a Christian conversion. There are gifts that you were able to do as a lost person (the old) which you bring as ways to serve others, there are also things that you receive from God as new gifts which are also used to serve others. This is a similar explanation to Douglas Ragner (Word Biblical Commentary – Volume 33a: Matthew 1-13) – however it seems that Ragner thinks the old things are being used in a new way. He also relies a little to heavily on the word scribe. The reason why I think this is a bad thing is because the parable is not able a scribe, it is about the head of a household.

What are your thoughts?

Lew

It has only been a week since my last post in this series. Since then, I have officially graduated! Yes, eight years and two colleges later and I finally have my sheepskin. Well, now that I have my degree, you all have to listen to me… right? Just kidding!

This next post is actually going to be about the next two parables in the list (the Parable of the Hidden Treasure and the Parable of the Merchant):
“The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid again; and from joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.”
- Matthew 13:44

“Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking fine pearls, and upon finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.”
- Matthew 13:45-46

These parables are extremely interesting to me. I have heard them both interpreted in completely different ways. Today, I would like to point out why, I feel, they can only be interpreted one way. We will use the context of both these parables as well as the previous parables to prove the interpretation.

The Parable of the Hidden Treasure may be the harder of the two to deal with. It is with this parable that I have heard people say that Jesus is the treasure and we give up everything for Jesus. This is an excellent thought and we do see Jesus telling people to lose everything to follow him, however, I think the Bible makes it clear that there is nothing we can do to merit gaining our Saviour. Our works and wealth are worthless when it comes to salvation. So, if we continue with our previous designations, we see that there is a Treasure hidden (the sons of the kingdom – much like seeds) in the field (the world). A man comes along and discovers this treasure. The man should represent the Son of God. He takes the treasure and hides it again until he can sell everything he has to buy the field.

This parable, although just one verse, is amazing to me because it completely summarizes the gospel. Jesus (the man in this parable) found a treasure (the people who are the sons of the kingdom) in the world. He gave up his life, lost everything, not to buy just the treasure, but to buy the whole field (or the whole world). Maybe it is just my personal theology leaking out, but it seems like there is definitely a distinction being made here concerning the difference between the elect and the world, and the fact that Jesus still died for the whole world, only to gain the treasure hidden in the world.

The next parable, the Parable of the Merchant, becomes much easier to interpret. Again, we keep the same designations; the merchant – a man – must be the Son of God. He too finds a treasure, this time a pearl of great value. He too sells everything he had and purchased the pearl. Again, an excellent summary of what Jesus did for us all on Calvary.

Thoughts?
Lew