Commentary on Matthew 20:1-16

Commentary on Matthew 20:1-16

by Dr. Knox Chamblin

THE PARABLE OF THE GENEROUS OWNER. 20:1-16.

I. THE CONTEXT.

A. The Enclosing Sayings.

A saying about "the first and the last" introduces and concludes the parable (19:30;

20:16).

B. The Originality of the Context.

Is the present context original? Some answer this question in the negative,contending that 20:16 obscures rather than expounds the parable's originalintention. C. H. Dodd writes that the saying of v. 16 "is found elsewhere indifferent contexts, and has no obvious appropriateness in relation to the parable"(The Parables of the Kingdom, 94). Joachim Jeremias thinks that v. 16 "has beenadded to our parable as a generalizing conclusion, but does not tally with itsmeaning" (Parables, 37). In Jeremias' judgment (p. 38), Jesus' own purpose intelling this parable was to vindicate his gospel (for "tax collectors and sinners")against its critics (notably "the scribes and the Pharisees") - in other words thatJesus' purpose here is the same as in the three parables of Lk 15 (cf. 15:1-2). Thusalso Dodd: this parable's "striking picture of the divine generosity" contributed to"Jesus' retort to the complaints of the legally minded who cavilled at Him as thefriend of publicans and sinners" (Parables, 94-95). On the contrary, I believe that

the above question should be answered affirmatively.

C. The Matthean Context.

I will argue (1) that 19:30 and 20:16 expound the parable's original meaning; (2)that the parable relates significantly to the teachings of chs. 18-19 and to theremainder of ch. 20; and (3) that Jesus' purpose here is similar to - but not identicalwith - his purpose in Lk 15 (note how the conversation between the landowner andthe first group of workers, Mt 20:9-15, recalls that between the father and the elderbrother in Lk 15:25-32).

II. THE PARABLE ITSELF.

A. The Introduction. 20:1a.

As in the parables of ch. 13, Jesus is not saying that "the kingdom of heaven is like

a landowner" (thus NIV), but rather that the following story depicts what happens

when the kingdom comes. "The Kingdom here is not compared to the master of

the house, nor to the labourers or the vineyard, but, as so often, its arrival is

compared to a reckoning" (Jeremias, 136). Thus the NEB is preferable: "The

kingdom of Heaven is like this. There was once a landowner..."

B. The Hiring of Workers.

1. The reckoning of hours. The day's work begins "early in the morning,"about 6 a.m. "The third hour" is then 9 a.m., "the sixth hour" 12 noon, "the ninthhour" 3 p.m., and "the eleventh hour" 5 p.m. - one hour before sundown and theend of the workday.

2. The wages. The denarius (Greek dsnarion) was the usual daily wagefor manual laborers. We might say that a denarius is equivalent to about 25 cents;but this is very misleading, given the fact that their standard of living, and thepurchasing power of their money, were very different from ours. "A good oxcould be bought for 100 denars, a young bullock for 20, a ram for 8, and a lambfor 4.... One denar per day was considered a good wage. The great Hillel didmanual labour for half that sum; and R[abbi] Meir, who was an accomplishedscribe, earned 2 denars a day as a writer of documents" (T. W. Manson, TheSayings of Jesus, 219).

3. The agreement. The parable relates that the landowner agreed to pay"a denarius for the day" to the first workers whom he hired (v. 2); that he agreed topay the second group "whatever is right" (v. 4); and that he "did the same thing"for the workers hired at 12 and at 3 (v. 5). However, he says nothing about a wagewhen he hires the "eleventh-hour" group; to them he says simply, "You also goand work in my vineyard" (v. 7).

C. The Paying of Workers.

1. The time of payment. The wages are paid at the end of the same day(v. 8), in accord with Lev 19:13b, "Do not hold back the wages of a hired manovernight" (Lev 19:13b). The rationale is given in Deut 24:14-15, "Do not takeadvantage of a hired man who is poor and needy, whether he is a brother Israeliteor an alien living in one of your towns. Pay him his wages each day before sunset,because he is poor and is counting on it."

2. The order of payment. The owner instructs his foreman to pay theworkers their wages, "beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first[arxamenos apo t©n eschat©n he©s t©n pr©t©n]" (v. 8b). Jeremias suggests thatv. 8 "was not originally concerned mainly with the order of payment, but meant,rather - 'Pay them all their wages, including the last'" (pp. 35-36). But in this caseit would have been more natural to say arxamenos apo t©n pr©t©n he©s t©neschat©n." As it stands, the Greek more naturally means that the last workershired were the first workers paid; so also Gundry, 397. (This in turn may help toexplain the grumbling of the first group: they witness the payment of the lastgroup.)

3. The amount of payment. Every worker receives the same wage, adenarius. Responding to the protestations of the first group, the landownerexplains that he has paid them according to his fairness and justice (v. 13), and thelast group according to his goodness and generosity (v. 15).

D. A Rabbinic Parallel.

The following story is preserved in the Jerusalem Talmud (and cited by Jeremias,

138).

At the funeral of a distinguished scholar named Rabbi Bun bar Hijja, another rabbi

presented a eulogy in parabolic form. "He began by saying that the situation waslike that of a king who had hired a great number of labourers. Two hours after thework began, the king inspected the labourers. He saw that one of them surpassedthe others in industry and skill. He took him by the hand and walked up and downwith him till the evening. When the labourers came to receive their wages, each ofthem received the same amount as all the others. Then they murmured and said:'We have worked the whole day, and this man only two hours, yet you have paidhim the full day's wages.' The king replied: 'I have not wronged you; this labourerhas done more in two hours than you have done during the whole day.' Solikewise, concluded the funeral oration, has Rabbi Bun bar Hijja accomplishedmore in his short life of 28 years than many a grey-haired scholar in a hundredyears (sc. therefore, after so brief a span of labour, God has taken him by the handand gathered him to himself)."

III. THE MESSAGE OF THE PARABLE.

A. Two Questionable Interpretations.

1. Historical allegory. T. W. Manson (Sayings, 219) thinks the parablespans Israel's history. The first workers represent the Patriarchs. The owner'sreturn to the marketplace at the third, sixth, and ninth hours recalls "thesummonses issued to Israel from time to time through the prophets." The eleventhhour is "the period of John the Baptist and Jesus Himself, [and the workers are]the publicans and harlots for whom there seemed to be no place" in the Kingdom.The hour of payment is "the end of the present age," when work is ended andrewards are given. To my mind such allegorizing is unwarranted (especially in theabsence of such an interpretation from Jesus, as in 13:18-23, 37-43), unnecessary

and misleading (see below). But cf. comments on 21:33-44.

2. Theological eisegesis. Nor is the parable intended to teach that God'sappointed way of salvation is by grace and not by works. This is indeed a Biblicalprinciple, powerfully advocated by Paul and upheld in Mt itself. But the validityof a principle does not guarantee the presence of a principle. Manson rightlystates that "the parable has nothing to do with the question of salvation by grace orworks" (p. 218). If we try to argue that it does, then we quickly run into aproblem. For the first workers receive the very same wage as those who are hiredlast; and if the latter group is paid out of the pure generosity of the owner, the firstworkers are (according to the agreement) receiving precisely what they deserve.The owner's dealings with the first group illustrate the principle of Rom 4:4, "Nowwhen a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an

obligation." But Paul is arguing that all are saved on other grounds. The parable's

true intention lies elsewhere.

B. The Grace of the Landowner.

The owner of the vineyard is unquestionably the central figure in the parable(Jeremias, Parables, 136). The most outstanding characteristics of the owner arehis goodness and generosity, qualities he has every right to exercise (note howthese qualities are accentuated at the climax of the parable, vv. 14-15). It hardlymatters whether we identify the owner as God the Father (ibid., 37) or as Jesus(Gundry, 397). For God is "with us" in Jesus Christ his Son; and it is in the personand work of Jesus that the goodness and generosity of God come to supreme andfinal (i.e. eschatological) expression. The conduct of the owner toward the lastgroup of workers, shows that he is not acting in accord with "strict justice andsound economics" (Manson, Sayings, 220).

Moreover, unlike the rabbinic parable cited above, there is not the slightestevidence in this parable that this group is more deserving than those who haveworked all day. "The labourers who were engaged last show nothing to warrant aclaim to a full day's wages; that they receive it is entirely due to the goodness oftheir employer" (Jeremias, 139). In Manson's words, "God's love cannot beportioned out in quantities nicely adjusted to the merits of individuals. There issuch a thing as the twelfth part of a denar. It was called a pondion. But there isno such thing as a twelfth part of the love of God" (Sayings, 220).

C. The Equality of the Workers.

We now return to the sayings which enclose the parable itself. Jesus says in19:30, "But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first."And he says in 20:16, "So the last will be first, and the first will be last."

1. The key to interpretation. It is clear that Matthew records these twosayings to help interpret the parable they enclose. First, and most obviously, heputs the saying both before and after the parable; the two form an inclusio.(Owing to the climax of the parable, 20:16 reverses the order of the clauses. Butthis fact does not in the least diminish the force of the repetition; if anything, itheightens it.) Secondly, 20:1 is linked to 19:30 by the conjunction "for" (gar):"For the kingdom of heaven is like this" (the "for" was absent from NIV's 1sted. but is properly included in the 2nd ed.); and likewise 20:16 is joined to thepreceding parable by the adverb "thus" (hout©s). By these means, Matthew pointsus both to his and to Jesus' main purpose in relating the parable.

2. The first and the last. If the flanking sayings help us to understand thepurpose of the parable, the parable helps us to understand the sense of the twosayings. In the parable all the workers - from the first ones hired to the last – aretreated equally. Each one receives a denarius, no more and no less, vv. 12, 14. (The distinction remains, of course, between the owner's justice to the first and hisgenerosity to the last.) Accordingly, I suggest that in this context, the sayings of19:30 and 20:16 are to be understood in the sense that the first equals the last, andthe last equals the first. (The reversal of the order of the clauses in 20:16underscores the point.) Jeremias mentions this interpretation, noting the same

thought in 4 Ezra 5:42 ("He said to me: I will make my judgment like a rounddance; the last therein shall not be behind, nor the first in front"). Yet he adds,"But, leaving this out of consideration, the point of the story, intended to startle theaudience, was surely not, 'Equal pay for all,' but 'So much more pay for the last'"(Parables, 36). But the parable itself relates that there was equal pay for all; thelast workers do not receive more pay than the others.

Why did Jesus tell this parable? What needs was he addressing?

D. The Perils of Pride.

1. The social context. In Lk 15 Jesus addresses an audience beyond thecommunity of disciples - an audience opposed to Jesus because he receives "taxcollectors and sinners" (15:1-2). In Mt 20 he addresses persons within thecommunity of disciples. Ever since ch. 16 (where Jesus abandons the religiousopposition, v. 4, and where in the wake of Peter's confession he begins to teach thedisciples about his forthcoming Passion and Triumph, vv. 13-28), Jesus hasincreasingly concentrated on instructing his disciples. This is especially evident in ch. 18, the uniting subject of which is relationships in the Church. While thePharisees and the crowd are again present in ch. 19, Jesus continues to offer

instruction to the community of believers (concerning marriage, children, and

wealth); and at the end of the chapter he speaks of the prospects for his followers.

It is out of these closing verses of ch. 19 that the parable arises. 19:30 is included

in Jesus' answer to the remarks of Peter in v. 27; and (as we have seen) the parable

of 20:1-15 is offered as an exposition of 19:30. In other words, the parable is

addressed to the Church.

2. The danger. In Mt 18, by calling disciples to humility and compassiontoward the erring within the community of believers, Jesus warns against pride inChristian relationships - against pride's competitiveness (see comments on 6:1-18)and against its urge to exert power over other people. Then in 19:27-30 Jesuspromises the apostles positions of singular authority (next only to that of the Sonof Man himself) in the coming kingdom. We can easily imagine how the apostlesmight become inflamed with pride as they reflected upon that honor. Does not theambition so evident in 20:20-28 grow out of 19:28? Now that the twelve apostlesare promised "twelve thrones" alongside Jesus, the mother of two of the apostlescraves yet more on her sons' behalf - namely the thrones closest to Jesus! And herrequest in turn arouses the indignation - rooted in the competitive pride - of theother ten disciples.

3. The lesson. In face of all this, Jesus presents the parable of 20:1-15, inthe process carrying forward the teaching of ch. 18. Jesus has promised the twelveapostles positions of singular honor. Even as he does so, he is aware of the greattemptations that such honor will bring. (Such are the risks he willingly takes.Significantly, the certainty of dangers does not cause him to withhold or towithdraw the honor itself.) In face of those dangers, Jesus says, "The first are likethe last, and the last are like the first." Let the apostles beware lest, in ponderingtheir exalted position, they become proud and begin to despise and lord it over themembers under their care. Let the apostles remember that, while there aredifferences of function in the Church (some indeed are apostles, others are not),there is a fundamental metaphysical equality among all members. As the parable

shows, even the least members - indeed especially the least - of the Churchreceive the great goodness and generosity of God. Let church leaders beware lestthey treat such folk with undue harshness and in terms of strict justice. Let theapostles and other leaders beware lest they begrudge such people the generosity ofGod (cf. v. 15) and thus come to emulate the attitude of the Pharisees (Lk 15). Onthe contrary, let the leaders reach out to such people with the very love andcompassion and grace of the Church's Lord. 1 Pet 5:1-6 shows that Peter learnedthe lesson well.