Your Will Be Done - What Did I Just Agree To?

I spent the first ten years of my life growing up in a traditional church. Traditional churches have a reputation for following strictly to a liturgy, so strictly that some liturgy almost has a requirement to appear in every single Sunday worship service. One piece of liturgy recited every Sunday contains reciting the Lord’s prayer. Naturally, I learned to memorize the Lord’s prayer, and quite imaginably, anybody who grew in a traditional church (and maybe even some contemporary and charismatic churches) also memorized the Lord’s prayer in the same rote repetition. Sometimes the danger of the rote repetition could result in somebody reciting the Lord’s prayer without really considering the words spoken or their meaning. If carefully considering the meaning of the words, phrases and sentences, someone might hesitate halfway through, where the prayer says, “your will be done.” What exactly is the believer agreeing to when praying “your will be done”? What are the exact terms and conditions the Christian signs off on when praying “your will be done”? Both of those questions deserve further exploring.

Without further ado, I invite you to turn to Matthew 6:9-13, commonly known as the Lord’s Prayer. The Lord’s prayer does also appear in Luke 11:2-4, but interesting enough, it does omit a few lines, one of which includes “Your will be done.” Now no one should confuse this omission as Luke rejecting the line, as if he didn’t like it or downright hated it, for Luke does record the line (or something similar) elsewhere. For example, when Jesus prays in the Garden of Gethsemane in Luke 22, Jesus closes the prayer in Luke 22:42 with the line “Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.” As another example, in Acts 21:14, when the Christians of Caesarea try to convince Paul not to go to Jerusalem, but Paul will not be persuaded by their attempts, they conclude, “Let the will of the Lord be done.” Clearly, Luke has no objection to the line, so why did he omit it? One of the prominent theories suggest that Luke saw the line “your will be done” as redundant repetition of the prior line “your kingdom come.” According to Luke, if God’s kingdom comes, then God’s will is done, and if the Lord’s will is done, then the Lord’s kingdom has come. Matthew, as a Jew writing to Jews, knew that the Old Testament poetry had something called synonymous parallelisms, in which two lines say the exact same thing/idea with similar yet different words in order to emphasis the idea. What Luke saw as redundancy and repetition Matthew saw as emphasis. Therefore, a proper understanding of “your will be done” first requires the proper interpretation of “your kingdom come.”

Throughout the Old Testament, everybody from prophets to priests to poets, yearned for the Messiah to establish his messianic kingdom (1 Chronicles 16:33; Psalms 96:13, 98:9; Isaiah 13:6, 24:23, 26:21, 32:22, 52:7; Joel 2:1; Micah 1:3; Zephaniah 3:15; Zechariah 14:1&9; Malachi 4:5). By praying “your kingdom come,” and likewise, “your will be done,” in the Lord’s prayer, the person praying shares in the same zeal for the Christ to set up his kingdom. This idea of the Messiah establishing his messianic kingdom finds its basis in the Lord’s covenant promises to his covenant people. Praying God’s kingdom come, and similarly, the Lord’s will be done, means to pray that the Lord will fulfill all his covenant promises. Covenant promises he made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; covenant promises he made to Moses and the Israelites at Mount Sinai; and covenant promises he made to David.

Praying “your kingdom come” sounds like an odd request in the greater context of Matthew. Earlier in Matthew 3:2 and 4:17, Jesus announces that the kingdom of God is at hand. Later in Matthew 12:28, Jesus declares that him casting out demons proves that the kingdom of God has come. The problem, however, is that not everybody acknowledges and recognizes it. Jesus will later on illustrate this with a series of parables in Matthew 13, most notably the parable of the mustard seed and yeast, which emphasis the explosive expansion of the kingdom of God in the future. Scholars call this tension the “already-not yet” duality. Therefore, the kingdom in mind in Matthew 6:10 would be the eschatological kingdom, or the kingdom of God established in the new heaven and new earth. As foretold by the prophets, this is when the Lord’s plan for future history comes to full completion. Thus, the prayer asks that this fully realized kingdom comes sooner than later. The goal of the prayer is the future of kingdom of God may be just as real as the present kingdom of God. Just like praying “Hallowed by your name,” the person praying does not ask for the petition to become true, for the statement is already true. Instead, the praying person requests for that future kingdom, which everyone does acknowledges and recognizes. If any direct application arises from this line, the line prays that the disciples of Jesus will faithfully and obedient spread the kingdom of God by living out what Jesus taught, including everything from what they say to what they do.

Therefore, it makes sense to think of praying “your will be done” under the same exact “already-not yet” dichotomy. True disciples of Jesus, who call Jesus their Lord and Savior, already participate in the will of the Lord, but praying “your will be done” asks that everybody will contribute to the will of God across the world. Still, the question remains on what it means to pray “your will be done.”

So what does it mean to pray “Your will be done?”

Praying “your will be done” means the person praying asking God’s plan of salvation to come to full fruition. In 1 Timothy 2:4, Paul writes to Timothy that God” desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” Whether your Calvinist and believe this verse only applies to the elect, or if your Arminian and believe that all people means every single person, the truth remains that when people come to the saving knowledge and truth of Jesus Christ, the kingdom of God expands in membership. It only makes sense that the more souls saved, the more souls will contribute to the will of God.

Praying “Your will be done” includes praying the Lord will overthrow the sin that the earth has become enslaved to and returning the world into the very good and sinless creation God originally made. God’s will being done means that he is truly the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, with no other emperor, king, prince or governor competing with him for reign over the earth.

Praying “Your will be done” means for the removal of the sinful. It’s not something we like to think of, but Jesus has promised paradise to his disciples, and it won’t be paradise if evil and wickedness allows for pain and suffering to continue to haunt his followers.

Praying “Your will be done” means, as a disciple of Jesus, learning to submit in humility to the will of God. Throughout the book of Matthew, Jesus correlates the doing the will of the Lord as a marker of a true disciple. According to Matthew 7:21, those who do God’s will are the only ones who call rightfully call God their Lord, or master. In Matthew 12:50, Jesus calls those who do the Father’s Will his brothers, his sisters and mothers. The point of the parable in Matthew 21 is that the true disciple does the Lord’s will. As always, Jesus makes himself the perfect model of a human follower of Jesus by praying he can submit to the will of God, as seen in Matthew 26:42. Therefore, praying “your will be done” becomes an activity of humility and submission. Prayer now becomes a spiritual discipline of aligning the person’s will with the Lord’s will. The believer does not need to pray anything about or for himself or herself, the Christian knows that God has already taken care of sustaining and blessing him or her.

On that note, the cool thing is that the disciples of Jesus testify to already here part of the kingdom of God. While Christians cannot single-handedly usher in the kingdom of God by their own merit, in both preaching the gospel message and living out the kingdom, they proclaim that the kingdom of God is indeed at hand and within grasp. When disciples both preach the gospel and live out the kingdom, it makes the kingdom of God very real here and now. Therefore, when Christians pray “your will be done,” they ask the Father for the strength to be obedient to the calling that they have received. Again, this does not mean that the church will bring out new heaven and new earth themselves, but by living it out here and now, the church testifies to the certainty that Jesus will return and establish his kingdom.

Before diving deep into the last line in Matthew 6:10, a few questions need answering First, does “heaven” refer to God’s throne room, the paradise prepared for his disciples, outer space or the sky, or any place that recognizes Jesus as Savior and Lord? The second question to tackle is whether that last line is “on earth as it is in heaven” or “both in heaven and on earth,” for the Greek could technically translate into both. Third and last, how much of the previous parts of the prayer apply to the last line of Matthew 6:10: just “your will be done,” or “your kingdom come” with it or even the whole prayer up to this point! Theologically speaking, while rebellion can happen in heaven (see Ephesians 6:11&12 and Colossians 1:20), Matthew never depicts heaven containing the slightest bit of opposition to God. Heaven is the Lord’s throne, and from his throne, God rules heaven by his will. The future end goal is, however, that all of creation, both heaven and earth will unite fulfilling the will of God. Everybody and everything will do the will of God. In way, this closing line in Matthew 6:9 paints of picture of this inability to tell the difference between heaven and earth because everyone and everything talks and acts the same way. To conclude, the one praying should pray, “As in heaven, so on earth.”

The last line in Matthew 6:10 further emphasizes this “already-not yet” tension. The angels in heaven already worship Jesus as king, and they already do his will. The goal is to get humanity on earth to act the same way as the angels. The angels in heaven and the humans on earth should share the same priorities and values. Just as the angels in heaven fully, willingly, consistently and joyfully serve and worship Jesus, so should humans on earth fully, willingly, consistently and joyfully worship Jesus. In heaven, all the angels’ lifestyles, practices and traditions, both of a personal and corporate level, conform to the Lord’s standards, but here on earth, they do not. By praying “your will be done,” the person praying wishes that humanity’s lifestyles, practices and traditions, both of a personal and corporate level, will mold to the God’s principles.

When a Christian prays these lines of the Lord’s prayer in Matthew 6:10, the Christian himself or herself commits to contributing to bringing about the kingdom of God and doing the Lord’s will. After all, throughout history, as seen in both the Old Testament and the New Testament, God has chosen his people to achieve his goals.

Therefore, looking back on all three lines in Matthew 6:10, they all pray for the same thing: that the Lord’s plan of salvation will become the end goal of history. After all, it only makes sense, for the Lord’s kingdom coming to earth and the Lord’s will being done on earth all reflect the character of God, especially his holiness, as stated in Matthew 6:9 “hallowed by your name.” Thus, in a way, whatever the meaning of “your kingdom come” or “you will be done,” the prayer expresses awe at the spectacular plan that God has for the future, A true disciples yearns for earth to become like in regard to God’s kingdom and God’s will, and it has such an excitement that the person praying just wants God to bring it now. David L. Turner puts it best, “Such requests come from one whose hunger for righteousness on earth will not be satisfied with a snack, as it were, but only with the eschatological banquet associated with the age to come (5:6; cf. 8:11).”

God the Father is already King of king and Lord of lords on both earth and heaven (Matthew 11:25), and Jesus, as God the Son, shares in that same role and title (Matthew 28:18). Jesus came to establish his kingdom and his will. Thus, the disciples practice and perform the kingdom of God in both speech and action to correctly respond in demonstrating their anticipating to the fully realized kingdom on the New Heaven and New Earth, which Jesus started while ministering on earth (Matthew 13:37–43; 24:14; 28:20)

Thus, the line “on earth as it is in heaven,” closes out the first half of the Lord’s prayer centering entirely around the Lord and the Lord’s plan. Half of the prayer dedicates itself to sharing its appreciation, awe and wonder at God and God’s plan before asking of any petition.

Therefore, it only makes sense that the rest of the prayer consists of supplications, asking God to provide what the disciples need to bring about the kingdom of God and to live out the will of God. Even so, though, these supplications do not come from a selfish heart. These prayer requestions not only withhold from asking for wealthy possessions or lifestyles of the rich and the famous, they also withhold from requesting a need met, a problem solved or vengeance for a wrongdoing. The humble Christian, who really believes and conforms to the lifestyle expressed in this prayer, realizes he or she has no right to demand any of these things, especially if contradictory to God’s kingdom coming on the Lord’s will being done. Instead, the prayer requests center around the concern for the expanse of the Lord’s kingdom and the Lord’s will. Again, the believer does not have to worry about needs or wants because they know God will take care of it, for it’s part of his kingdom and his will. Thus, the disciples do not look forward to a time when they will leave the earthly plane and escape to heaven, but instead, they look for ways to bring God’s kingdom to earth by doing his will.

One last concluding thought. I like to joke with my Christian friends of other denominations (and I caution others when "joking" about this to other people, for somebody without a sense of humor will find this highly offensive) that "Every Christian is entitled to their church denomination of choice. God has given us that liberty, and God loves us all equally and the same, no matter what church denomination we choose. But when you get to heaven, you'll find we're all Mennonite." (See how that "joke" can easily offend?) With every joke, at least half of it finds its basis in seriousness. With so many other Christian denominations, they read the Sermon on the Mount, which the Lord's Prayer is part of, and they will say of it, "That's a nice ideal to look forward to at the New Heaven and New Earth when Jesus establishes his kingdom on earth, but right here right now on earth, that's not possible in this corrupt, fallen world. In this corrupt, fallen world, we must be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves" (see Matthew 10:16). The Mennonites, however, have rejected that answer. They have chosen something different. They have chosen what other Christian denominations call impossible. The Mennonites have put so much emphasis on kingdom living that they say, "You know what? We believe we don't have waiting for Jesus to establish the New Heaven and New Earth. We believe the Holy Spirit has empowered us to live out the kingdom of God right here and right now." Since the Mennonites do live out the kingdom of God, to the best of their ability, right here and right now, they get experience a little bit of heaven, so when they actually do go to heaven, they know how to live it out, whereas the other denominations might need a little bit more time getting use to things. All in all, what I'm trying to say is that the Mennonites' emphasis on living out God's kingdom come right here and now sets up the Mennonites to live out God's will being done. Let the Mennonites be the witness to the rest of the Christian denominations on what it means to live out the Lord's will be done.

Bibliography

Allen, Willoughby C. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew. International Critical Commentary. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1907.

Barbieri, Louis A., Jr. “Matthew.” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Edited by J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985.

Blomberg, Craig L. “Matthew.” Holman Concise Bible Commentary. Edited by David S. Dockery. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1998.

Blomberg, Craig. Matthew. Vol. 22 of The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992.

Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew. Vol. 1 of International Critical Commentary. London; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004.

France, Richard T. “Matthew.” Pages 904–45 in New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Edited by D. A. Carson, R. T. France, J. A. Motyer, and G. J. Wenham. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.

France, Richard T. The Gospel of Matthew. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007.

Hagner, Donald A. Matthew 1–13. Vol. 33A of Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1993.

Hughes, Robert B., and J. Carl Laney. Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. The Tyndale Reference Library. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001.

Jamieson, Robert, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.

Nolland, John. The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2005.

Spence-Jones, H. D. M., ed. St. Matthew. Vol. 1 of The Pulpit Commentary. London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909.

Turner, David L. Matthew. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008.

Weber, Stuart K. Matthew. Vol. 1 of Holman New Testament Commentary. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

Wiersbe, Warren W. The Bible Exposition Commentary. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Wiersbe’s Expository Outlines on the New Testament. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1992.

The Parable of the Landscaper (Matthew 13:44)

Oliver, a man never good at taking commands from a boss, decided he wanted to be his own boss, so he quit his landscaping job to start his own landscaping business. Unfortunately, Oliver decided to do this at the worst possible time: during the 2008 recession. Because of the housing bubble bursting in 2008, not too many people had yards that needed landscaping, and the few that did manage to hold on to their house couldn’t afford any more landscaping than mowing the lawn. Therefore, most of Oliver’s clients hired Oliver to mow their lawn, something Oliver use to do for his neighbors as his high school job. That did bum Oliver out a bit. He viewed his landscaping as a work of art, even naming his business Masterpiece Landscaping to reflect those views. He wanted decorate people’s yards like a work of art, not just mow their lawn, like he did in high school. Nevertheless, Oliver felt grateful that he had enough lawns to mow to keep his business afloat, and he tried to display that thankfulness to all his clients.

 

One of these clients was Alfred Pennybags. Alfred was an elderly man, so old he could barely take care of himself, yet he insisted he would die in the house he built when he was a younger man. Therefore, he hired maids to tend to the inside of the house, and Oliver to tend to the outside of the house. As so many of Oliver’s client, Alfred could only afford to pay Oliver to his mow his lawn, but what Alfred could not pay with hem, he tried to pay with hospitality. Alfred definitely stuck out to Oliver as his most hospitable client. Every time Oliver visit, it seemed like Alfred would attempt to extend him some sort of hospitality. One day it could be “Gee, it looks like I bought way too many cold cuts at the grocery store. If you want to come in and make yourself a sandwich, you can!” Another day could be, “Boy, it is quite a sunny and hot day! I got ice cold water, lemonade and iced tea in the fridge if you need a drink!” Of course, every day Alfred would remind Oliver, “If you ever need to use that bathroom, my doors are always open to you!” Of the three, Oliver only accepted the offer of the third, but only when Oliver forgot to use the bathroom between jobs. Those few times Oliver entered Alfred’s house, he noticed the walls decorated more with paintings of landscapes instead of photos of people. The few photos of people all seemed to have elderly people, around Alfred’s age. From these few photos, Oliver concluded that Oliver was the youngest of his sibling and had no wife or children of his own. By this time in Alfred’s life, all his family and friends had died. Oliver thought of this sad reality for Alfred a bit, and so Oliver would occasionally engage in small talk with Alfred, just so Alfred would feel less lonely.

One morning, as Oliver prepared for work, his phone rang. Looking at caller ID, it read “Susan Hida, Esquire.” At first reaction, Oliver’s heart sank. “Oh no, I’m getting sued! What did I do wrong?” After briefly thinking about it, Oliver concluded he did do nothing wrong, so no one should sue him. He then thought to himself, “Oh! A new client! An attorney, too! As a lawyer, I bet she has a big yard, which needs a lot of work. This could be a big account!” Oliver picked up the phone and answered the call. Clearing his throat, he said in his most professional voice, “Masterpiece Landscaping: Your yard is our canvas, and we will make you a masterpiece. How may I help you today?” “Oh, excellent, I have the right number,” said the voice at the opposite end of the line. “My name is Susa Hida. I am an attorney representing the estate of Alfred Pennybags. I regret to inform you that Mr. Pennybags died in his sleep last night.” Oliver’s heart sank into sadness. Yes, he was a little bit sad that he had lost a client to death, but he was a lot sad that he would never see and hear from such a friendly man ever again. “Oh, I am sorry to hear that,” Oliver spoke up, showing sympathy. “Yes,” the lawyer continued, “sadly, with no heir or next of kin alive, all of Mr. Pennybags’s household possessions, including the house itself, will be auctioned off to pay off any remaining debts, and the rest will be donated to Alfred’s favorite charities. I see on Mr. Pennybags’s wall calendar that your scheduled to mow his lawn tomorrow afternoon. Would you mind mowing his lawn one last time, so the yard will look neat for the property auction the next day? We will make sure you get your pay once the sale is finalized.” “I would be delighted to,” Oliver replied.

The next morning Oliver found it a lot harder to wake up and get ready for work, still dealing with the grief of Alfred’s passing. As Oliver loaded his truck, he got an idea. He would honor the memory of Alfred Pennybags by planting a tree in his yard. Yeah, sure, nobody else would know what the tree meant, but every time Oliver would drive by the house, he would see the tree and remember Alfred. Before driving to the house, Oliver stopped by a nursey on the way, picked out a nice evergreen, and then finished his journey to Alfred’s house. By the time, he got there, the maid staff was packing up, and they waved at each other passing. It gave Oliver the peace and quiet (besides the hum of the tractor) to reflect on Alfred. After finish mowing the lawn, Oliver found the perfect spot for the tree, where everybody driving by could see it. Of course, Oliver called 811, so he would know before he dug, and they assured him nothing existed below that he could hit if he dug. So Oliver began digging. He dug a pretty good size hole in the ground, but upon further inspection, he decided it could be a bit deeper. He plunged his shovel into the ground once again, but this time, it felt different. Shortly after, a black liquid, which had a distinct smell, slowly came bubbling into that hole. Yes, you guessed it. Black gold. Texas tea. Oil. At first reaction, Oliver panicked. “Oh no!” Oliver panicked. “I hit an oil pipeline! Now I will get sued!” but then Oliver realized something. “Wait a minute,” Oliver thought, “I did call 811, and they assured me nothing existed under the ground. Oliver’s eyes opened wide as he realized put it all together. Oliver had the discovered oil! Quickly, Oliver filled up the hole, threw all his equipment back in his truck and drove home as fast as could.

 

When Oliver got home, he barged into his house, so loudly it startled his wife Pearl. “PEARL! PEARL! How much money do we have in our checking account?” he screamed at the top of his lungs, as he ran around the house, looking for the checkbook.  “Why? Why are you asking that?” Pearl asked. “And how much money do we have in our savings account?” Oliver yelled, as he continued to run aimlessly around the house in search of the bank book. “Why are you asking? What happened? What did you do? Oh my gosh, are we getting sued?” An excited Oliver did not hear. “And how much do we have in our 401K or IRA or whatever our retirement plan is? And how much in stocks? And what about CDs? Do we have any of these?!” “Woah there!” Pearl said, stopping her husband in his tracks. “You’re going to slow down and explain to me what happened.” “Ok,” Oliver said, taking a breath. “So yesterday, I got a phone call from a lawyer…” “Oh my gosh, we are getting sued!” Pearl interrupted. “No, we’re not getting sued!” Oliver continued. “The attorney called to inform me that one of my clients died, and she asked if I could mow his one last time, to which I agreed. I decided that, not only would I mow the lawn, but I would also plant a tree in memory of him. I had nearly finished digging the hole for the tree when a black liquid came bubbling from the ground.” “Oh my gosh, you hit a pipeline! Why didn’t you call 811?” Pearl interrupted again. “Of course, I called 811!” Oliver continued. “They assured me absolutely nothing was there. Honey, I discovered an oil field!” Pearl’s face of concern turned into a face of excitement to match her husband’s.

That next morning, Oliver and Pearl marched down to their bank to withdraw all the money in both their checking and savings account and close the accounts. Then they drove down to the house that once belonged to Alfred, registered for the auction, and sat down in the back row, waiting for the auction of the actual property themselves. When it came time to auction off the property, it came very close, but Oliver and Pearl made the winning bid. They were now the owners of this property. The next day, Oliver went online to register “Oliver’s Oil LLC” as his new business’s name.

What you have just read is what I call The Parable of the Landscaper. This is a 21st century version of a parable Jesus told in the 1st century. Back while in seminary, my preaching professor taught us that when teaching a parable of Jesus, a preacher should re-tell the parable in a 21st century context. I agree with his teaching. All the parable Jesus taught Jesus extremely contextualized, so his open-minded audience would understand the message, while the close-minded audience would not understand. Therefore, Jesus used the 1st century culture as his context, a context which would make no sense to the modern-day culture in the 21st century. Thus, a  preacher should study what Jesus intended the parable to mean, and then teach the parable in a 21st century cultural context that the audience could comprehend. Still, because I am not an omniscient rabbi, my parable fails in comparison to the Lord’s parable, so let’s understand the original parable in light of the 1st century context.

Please turn to Matthew 13 in your Bible. Turning to Matthew 13, it becomes apparent Matthew 13 has plenty of parables, 6 in this chapter alone, to be exact. These 6 parables come in 2 sets of 3 parables each. For the first set, Jesus addresses crowds uncertain about his message. Therefore, the first set of parables seeks to explain why some accept Jesus while others reject Jesus. In regard to the second set, Jesus speaks to people convinced of his teaching, like his faithful disciples. Thus, these parables seek to understand how to take Jesus’s message deeper.

44 ⸆ Ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν θησαυρῷ κεκρυμμένῳ ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ, ὃν εὑρὼν ἄνθρωπος ἔκρυψεν, καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς αὐτοῦ ὑπάγει καὶ πωλεῖ °πάντα ὅσα ἔχει καὶ ἀγοράζει τὸν ἀγρὸν ἐκεῖνον.

~Matthew 13:44 (NA28)

The kingdom of heaven is like treasure that was hidden in the field, that having found it, a man hid it, and out of joy he goes away and sells all that he has and buys that field.

~Matthew 13:44 (my translation)

If reading Matthew 13:44 out of the KJV or NKJV, the verse begins with “again.” Modern scholarship has ruled out “again” belonging in the verse. The word “again” probably got added by a scribe copying the text, attempting to show that the Parable of the Hidden Treasure in Matthew 13:44 links back to the Parable of the Leaven in Matthew 13:33, which links back to the Parable of the Mustard Seed in Matthew 13:31 (and even possible the Parable of the weeds in Matthew 13:24. Not only do the earliest manuscripts discovered not have this “again,” but it does not make sense in how Matthew structured his gospel. If Matthew did intend to link all the parables in Matthew 13 as one solid teaching, he would not have interrupted it with an explanation of a parable right in the middle. Most likely, Jesus taught the first 3 parables in Matthew 13 at a different place and time than the last 3 parables in Matthew 13.

In this parable, Jesus uses a simile to compare the kingdom of heaven to a hidden treasure in a field. The kingdom of heaven in Matthew equates to the same kingdom of God in Mark and Luke. The Jewish people held God in such high esteem that they selectively referred to him. Since Matthew, a Jew, writes his Gospel to Jewish people, he uses the same respect and regard to God by calling it the kingdom of heaven. The Greek term θησαυρός (thesauros) literally translates into “treasure,” and its definition stays true for both Greek and English. It refers to something of high value, and it can be anything of high value. The participle used to describe this treasure is κεκρυμμένῳ (kekrummeno). Literally, it translates to “hidden,” but in the context of this verse, it means “buried.”

Simply because Jesus compares the kingdom of God to hidden treasure, no one should think of hidden treasure like a pirate’s buried treasure, like that of Treasure Island (although such stories did exist during the time of Jesus). No one should equate this parable to winning the lottery (although that will be discussed later). For both of those, one can chalk it up to an accident or luck. This parable actually had a very purposeful and very probable likelihood. Remember that banking as known today did not exist until fairly recent in history, around the late Middle Ages. During the time of Jesus, the business of banking solely went to loans. People only used banks to borrow money in the form of a loan and pay back that loan. Banks did not hold people’s money. Therefore, when a person wanted to save or store riches in a safe place away from robbers and raiders, especially in times of uncertainty, they would put their valuables (coins, precious metals, gemstones) in sometimes a wooden box, or more often, a clay jar, and then place it in a secure location, like the innermost closet, a vault under the house or a chosen spot in the field. Those in urban settings could only bury it under the house, while those in rural settings could bury it anywhere on their property, including their fields. Someone at this point may think, “Wouldn’t the treasure be buried safer within the walls in the house?” Maybe, but within the floorplan of the house, the robber or thief only has only a little surface area to cover in comparison to the house and the fields of a farmer, which the robber or thief would have a lot to cover.

Such a process should not sound too foreign, as the New Testament references it many times. When Paul writes “But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us” in 2 Corinthians 4:7 (ESV), he refers to this practice. In the Parable of the Talents, as told in Matthew 25:14-30 and Luke 19:12-27, when Jesus says that the third servant hid his talent in the ground, he refers to this practice.

 

In the late 1940s, the Dead Sea Scrolls, scrolls written by the Qumran community, a people during the intertestamental time (between the Old Testament and New Testament), were discovered. The most important discovery among these scrolls were copies of the Old Testament books, the oldest copies still in existence. The second most important discovery among these scrolls was scrolls recording community living. They have given modern scholars an eye into Jewish life during the intertestamental times and the 1^st century Greco-Roman world. In the third cave, a bronze scroll was discovered. One would think it would have some important Scripture passage on it to be worth of bronze. Nope, it did not any Old Testament Scripture. Rather, the bronze scroll had a treasure map! Ok, that’s a little bit of an embellishment, but in cave 3 the bronze scroll did list the hidden treasures of all the households. Scholars hypothesize that the Romans were encroaching in on this Qumran community (the Essenes of the Qumran community were very much a sect), and the Qumran community feared the Romans would make an example by executing the leaders which would be a problem considering only the leaders knew the burial location of the family treasure, so they wrote it down in case somebody became the new leaders. Again, this scroll proves the regular practice of buried treasures.

 

With this knowledge in mind, this one verse in Matthew 13:44 sets up a detailed setting. A rural man, probably a farmer (because he has a field), has passed away, leaving his home and the land on which it resides to an heir. The heir, either unknowing of the buried treasure or forgetful of the buried treasure, has no personal intention for the land, so he decides to sell it to pocket some extra cash. From here, the setting can diverge into two different scenarios. Perhaps the heir hires somebody to tend to the field, overgrown with weeds, so it looks presentable for sale. Upon cleaning up the field, the employee notices something sticking out of the plowed ground, and thus discovers the treasure (the above modern re-telling of the parable went this direction, as do a majority of scholars). Maybe the heir has invited potential buyers to an “open house” of sorts to inspect the land before buying (cf. Luke 14:18). Upon his inspection of the field, he notices that the recent storm has eroded some ground, revealing something buried in the ground. In either scenario, the man fears he will lose the  treasure, so he acts by hiding it again. Perhaps he fears that the heir may change his mind about selling the field if the hear finds out about the discovery, or maybe he fears it will attract even more people to bid on the land, especially the rich who he could not outbid, or even possibly than a thief will rob the land of the treasure, so the finder hides the treasure again.  In either situation, the man discovering the treasure buries it again until he can buy the land, and thus claim rightful possession of the treasure.

Somebody might question the morality of the man who, upon, discovering the buried treasure, hides it again and buys the land to take possession of it, instead of reporting it to the seller. Even if someone from modern times does not question it, someone from the time of Jesus would have definitely questioned it. Interesting enough, though, as crazy as this sounds, believe it or not, the rabbis highly debated the morally right action for the exact scenario depicted in Matthew 13:44. Since such a highly debated situation had a range of answers from the rabbis, the rabbis did come to a general consensus. Most often, the answer depended on what treasure consisted of. Here, the Pharisees and Sadducees did what the Pharisees and Sadducees did best: nitpick the Law down to the letter to make it more complicated. For example, if the treasure consisted of coins scattered about, it belonged to the man discovering it, but if it the treasure consisted of piles of coins, which the religious leaders defined as three coins on top of each other, it belonged to the owner. Generally speaking, the rabbis went by the age-old saying of “finders-keepers, losers-weepers,” but only in the case when the original owner could not prove possession or died and the discoverer proved he represented himself instead of somebody else. If ever unclear, the disputing parties split the treasure in half. Ultimately, the man’s integrity has no impact on the parable, as it concludes the same way, whether the man acted properly or improperly. If anything, the man deserve praise for his discernment and prudence on the fly to give up his possessions in exchange for this property.

That also leads to another clue about the treasure. Somebody might have wondered why the man who discovered the treasure did not, in the words of the Steve Miller Band, “take the money and run.” If the man did take the treasure without buying the field, the original owning family could ultimately accuse him of stealing it, and rightfully so. If the man who found the treasure purchased the land, then everything on or in the land becomes his possession, including the treasure. Quite possibly, though, the man discovered a large treasure, so large that it does not fit in his pockets or his bag. Such a big treasure would fit the metaphor here. Either way, the only way to obtain the treasure would involve obtaining the field.

Before moving on to what the parable means, let it be clear what it does not mean. No one should mistake buying the field to equate to buying salvation. Rather, the man’s willingness to buy the field at all costs represents pursing the kingdom of heaven at all costs. The pursuit of the kingdom of heaven does not limit itself giving up money and other worldly possessions, it also requires sacrificing time and resources in exchange for spiritual discipline

Notice how the buried treasure in this parable laid deep in the ground the whole time. The heir who inherited the land could have found the treasure himself if he would have just looked for it. In fact, the man who discovers the treasure did not go out hunting for treasure, yet he stumbles upon it. The parable may even go as far to hint that only by divine intervention the man found the treasure. Likewise, the presence of the kingdom of God might be out in the open, but the only ones who can see it are those who actively seek it. After all, “Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, [Jesus] answered them, ‘The kingdom of God is not coming in ways that can be observed, nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you’”  (Luke 17:20&21 ESV). Through nature, the Lord has revealed his presence, and through the Scriptures, God has revealed his will. Humanity just has to look for it. Some will merely stumble upon him, but others, as seen in the next parable, will seek and find it.  This parable clearly puts emphasis on the man finding the treasure. Likewise, Jesus highlights the importance of seeking the kingdom of God. For those who have found it, they can aid in helping the lost find the kingdom of God. They can help by pointing out the need for salvation or the way to Christ.

Note the man’s heart and mind when it comes to his choice of actions. While the man’s behavior come across as thoughtless, the man actually reveals the decision is a no brainer. The decision to give up all comes with ease and in happiness. The man never feels like he should do it because it ought to do it or it is the right thing to do. He gives up all because he wants to give up all, and he gives up all with joy because he knows the payout is worth it. Anybody pursuing the kingdom of heaven should feel the same way. The kingdom of heaven’s worth far outweighs any earthly riches, so the disciple of Jesus needs to pursue the kingdom of heaven as those of the world pursue wealth. Not only does this pursuit of the kingdom of heaven include giving up worldly possessions, it also requires sacrificing time and resources in exchange for spiritual discipline.

Now here fits the lottery analogy. Back in January 2016, the Power Ball lottery reached an all-time high of $1,590,000,000, setting a record for any U.S. lottery. The odds of winning that Power Ball jackpot is 1 in292,200,000 because there are 292,200,000 possible combinations of Power Ball numbers. Power Ball tickets go for $2.00 per ticket. 292,200,000 x $2.00 = $584,400,000. Not counting taxes, and assuming one sole person won that lottery, if that person bought $584,400,000 worth in lottery tickets, he or she would have spent $584,400,000 to make $1,590,000,000. That’s a 172% profit! For the Christian who finds the lottery sinful, remove the premise, but keep the numbers. If somebody promised someone else $1,590,000,000 in exchange for a $584,400,000, and that somebody could assure that investment wasn’t a scam, a pyramid scheme or a cult (if your business’s motto is “It’s not a [insert name of good/service here]; it’s a lifestyle!” then it’s a cult because the Christian’s lifestyle is Jesus, not some good/service, no matter how effect said good/service is), of course that someone would do everything in his or her power to get that $584,400,000 because of the 172% profit! What would that involve? It would involve liquidating assets. It would involve withdrawing all money. All in all, it would have to mean prioritizing the drive for the money. Anything less, and the person would not achieve the funds needed. If someone would make such a pursuit for worldly wealthy, how much more for the Christian pursuing the kingdom of heaven!

Honestly, Jesus asked for a lot in exchange for the kingdom of heaven. For example, Jesus commanded a man with great wealth to sell all his possessions and donate the money to the poor (Matthew 19:21/Mark 10:19/Luke 18:22). Jesus instructed this command, not because the man with great wealth had to buy his ticket into heaven, but because the man’s wealth got in the way of his full loyalty to God and his kingdom. Jesus instructed his disciples that he had to become a priority over their own family (Matthew 10:37/Luke 14:26). Jesus taught that a human must give us the world and his or her life in exchange for a life that may lead to the cross, or death (Matthew 16:24-26/Mark 8:34-37/Luke 9:23-25). If anyone thinks Jesus asked for too much, that person should not forget how much Jesus gave up for them. Philippians 2:6-8 reminds everyone of the three-fold self-sacrifice Jesus gave. First, Jesus gave up his divine, godly throne in heaven. Second, Jesus gave up the right to have a royal or priestly birth, and in exchange, he took up a birth in a lower-class family. Third, Jesus gave up the right to a long life and peaceful death for a short life and horrible execution. Jesus gave that all up to seek after and chase after humanity, then the least humanity could do in exchange involves sacrificing worldly wealth, family and freedom! If Jesus can give up so much for his contribution to the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of heaven most definition expects the same self-sacrificing contribution from believers.

In conclusion, the Parable of the Hidden Treasure teaches 4 truths about kingdom living. First, always look out for the kingdom of heaven. Second, the kingdom of heaven costs the Christian everything, yet it profits far exceeds its expenses. Third, pursuit of the kingdom of God must become a priority for the Christian, and any business that gets in the way must be rejected. Fourth, the Christian should appropriately respond to the kingdom of God with joy. In the Greek text, the phrase “out of joy” is fronted. Jesus emphasized that joy is the right emotional response to the kingdom of God.

Bibliography

Barry, John D., Douglas Mangum, Derek R. Brown, Michael S. Heiser, Miles Custis, Elliot Ritzema, Matthew M. Whitehead, Michael R. Grigoni, and David Bomar. Faithlife Study Bible. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012, 2016.

Blomberg, Craig L. “Matthew.” Holman Concise Bible Commentary. Edited by David S. Dockery. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1998.

---. Matthew. Vol. 22. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992.

Campbell, Iain D. Opening up Matthew. Opening Up Commentary. Leominster: Day One Publications, 2008.

France, R. T. The Gospel of Matthew. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007.

---. “Matthew.” Pages 904–45 in New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Edited by D. A. Carson, R. T. France, J. A. Motyer, and G. J. Wenham. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.

Freeman, James M., and Harold J. Chadwick. Manners & Customs of the Bible. North Brunswick, NJ: Bridge-Logos Publishers, 1998.

Hagner, Donald A. Matthew 1–13. Vol. 33A. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1993.

Hughes, Robert B., and J. Carl Laney. Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. The Tyndale reference library. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001.

Jamieson, Robert, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.

Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Knowles, Andrew. The Bible Guide. 1st Augsburg books ed. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 2001.

Mills, M. S. The Life of Christ: A Study Guide to the Gospel Record. Dallas, TX: 3E Ministries, 1999.

Newman, Barclay Moon, and Philip C. Stine. A Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. UBS Handbook Series. New York: United Bible Societies, 1992.

Nolland, John. The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2005.

Robertson, A.T. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1933.

Spence-Jones, H. D. M., ed. St. Matthew. Vol. 2. The Pulpit Commentary. London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909.

Stein, Robert H. “Differences in the Gospels.” Pages 1500–1501 in CSB Study Bible: Notes. Edited by Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017.

Utley, Robert James. The First Christian Primer: Matthew. Vol. Volume 9. Study Guide Commentary Series. Marshall, TX: Bible Lessons International, 2000.

Ward, Wayne E. “Matthew.” The Teacher’s Bible Commentary. Edited by H. Franklin Paschall and Herschel H. Hobbs. Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1972.

Weber, Stuart K. Matthew. Vol. 1. Holman New Testament Commentary. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

The Parable of Factory-Made Homes (Matthew 7:24-27)

Drew and Scott, 2 co-workers, were both shocked and surprised to see each other at Big Al’s Factory-Made Home Sales. After chatting in the waiting room a bit, the two men realized it made sense for both of them to be there. Both men worked for the same company, under the same job title with job description. Both of them worked the same shift and hours, and both got paid the same wages. Both of them put aside a little of each paycheck in a savings account to put towards a house, and now both of them had saved enough to purchase a house, so they could move out of their small apartments. It only made sense that they both went to Big Al’s Factory-Made Home Sales, the most affordable homes in the area.

After a short while, Big Al invited both men into his office to finish signing and initialing papers, so they could officially become home owners. As both men signed here and initialed there, Big Al spoke up in his southern draw, “Now I’m going to give you boys a tip. I know my houses look so fine that they look like you can move into them day one, but these houses need a foundation. Heed my advice and build a foundation for your home before moving into them.” Drew and Scott paused and looked at each other. They knew they both thought the same thing, but only Scott bravely spoke. “Are you kidding me?! You know how much money I’ve poured into this home! Now you want me to spend even more money by building foundation?! I think not! I suppose I could save some by cutting labor costs and providing my own labor, but I already burned enough of my free time working overtime in order to save up for this home, and I’m not about to waste anymore free time by building a foundation. Please deliver the home to the address I provided in the paperwork and place it on the cinder blocks. It will be good enough for me.” With that, Scott signed his last signature, initialed his last initials, snatched his keys and walked out of the office.

Drew leaned back in the office chair. He thought about what Scott said, and he could definitely relate. He too worked a lot of overtime and spent a lot of money on his home. Big Al, on the other hand, made a good point, too. Al had worked in the business so long, he must knew what he was talking about. After signing his last signature and initialing his last initials, Drew asked Big Al if he could kindly hold on to the home until Drew had a foundation in place on his lot. Big smiled and agreed. Drew then went back to his apartment and called his landlord to see if he could extend the lease a bit longer. The landlord understood and agreed to extend the lease another month. Then Drew began laying his foundation. It might have taken him a few more weeks to move in his new home than Scott, but finally, Drew could move into his new house.

Shortly after Drew moved into his new home, meteorologists buzzed on the news about Hurricane Damion. “Hurricane Damion is on its way! Just because this hurricane has been downgraded from a category 5 hurricane to a category 3 hurricane does not mean it should be taken lightly! Gather up supplies. You may go days without power or water. Board up your houses. When the hurricane comes, remember to stay in the center room of your house on downstairs floor.” Everyone listened the meteorologists. Anyone who attempted to go to a grocery store within a 5-mile radius of their home found all the bottled water and batteries sold out! Both Drew and Scott prepared for the storm, buying extra supplies and boarding up the houses. Both felt confident in their new homes. Drew felt especially assured with his newly laid foundation. Scott did feel confident, but as the hurricane got closer, Scott thought about how his father and mother complained that he never visited enough, so Scott decided now would be a good time to visit his parents out in the Great Plains.

The day came when the Hurricane Damion arrived. It only took 1 day to pass through, but it left its mark, from the uprooted trees to the down power lines. When Drew heard the hurricane passed over, he walked out the front door, took a few steps out into the front lawn, and he looked back at his house. The hurricane’s winds had ripped off a few shingles and a strip of siding, but besides that, the home stood intact. Drew smiled, glad he took Big Al’s advice. A few days later, Scott’s flight home touched down in the airport. From there, Scott drove home…or at least he thought he did. When Drew got there, he found an empty lot. He went to go look at the house number on the mailbox, but the mailbox had disappeared, too. He checked the GPS on his phone, and yes, he had the write address. Where was his house? After driving around a bit, in the nearby trailer park, Scott found his home…or what he believed to be his home. In reality, Scott found a pile of wood, drywall and insulation. Scott pulled out his cell phone, dialed up his mother, and said, “Hey mom, you know how you always complain that I never visit enough? Well, guess whose coming back to visit?”

What you have just read is what I call The Parable of the Factory-Made Homes. This is a 21st century version of a parable Jesus told in the 1st century. Back while in seminary, my preaching professor taught us that when teaching a parable of Jesus, a preacher should re-tell the parable in a 21st century context. I agree with his teaching. All the parable Jesus taught Jesus extremely contextualized, so his open-minded audience would understand the message, while the close-minded audience would not understand. Therefore, Jesus used the 1st century culture as his context, a context which would make no sense to the modern-day culture in the 21st century. So preacher should study what Jesus intended the parable to mean, and then teach the parable in a 21st century cultural context that the audience could comprehend. Still, because I am not an omniscient rabbi, my parable fails in comparison to the Lord’s parable, so let’s understand the original parable in light of the 1st century context.

I invite you to turn Matthew 7:24-27. Recall that Matthew is a Jewish man, writing to a Jewish audience, convincing them that Jesus was the long-awaited Jewish Messiah. Matthew does so by stocking his Gospel account full of Old Testament references. Old Testament references does not merely refer to quoting Old Testament Scripture. Matthew constantly paints Jesus in light of the Old Testament heroes of faith, like Abraham, Moses and David, to display HIM as like these men, but better. This parable comes from the Sermon of Mount. Just as Moses taught the Israelites the Law on Mount Sinai, so Matthew paints Jesus, on the Mount, teaching the Law, just like Moses. In accordance with covenants, after listing the laws and stipulations of the covenant, Moses would then pronounce blessings to those who obey and denounce curses on those who disobey. In the same way, Jesus ends his teaching with promises to bless the obedient and curse the disobedient, in the form of a parable. More specifically, this famous parable concluding the Sermon on the Mount. This context gives a stronger meaning to the Sermon on the Mount itself. Jesus just finished teaching believers about kingdom of heaven living. This parable challenges the audience to follow the teaching Jesus just laid before them. Jesus knows the crowd heard his teaching, and now he challenges the crowd to listen to his teaching. The choice does not lie within which teachings to accept and reject, but rather, the crowd can only choose to either follow the teachings presented before them. If the people put the teachings of Jesus into practice, the people have accepted them, but if they don’t put Christ’s words into practice, the people reject them. As commentator R.T. France states, “The teaching of the Sermon of the Mount is not an ideal to be admired, but a law to be obeyed.”

“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock.” ~Matthew 7:24

Following the pattern of Proverbs (see Proverbs 10:8&14), Jesus parallels a wise man and foolish man, only with a slight different, demonstrating that the contrasting decisions result in contrasting consequences. For the first simile, Jesus compares those who listen to his words to a wise man who built his house upon the rock. In the Greek, Jesus emphasizes the word “mine,” demonstrating that his teaching is not another rabbi’s interpretation but the truth from God himself. Up to this point, the Jewish people put their hopes in the traditions and interpretations of the Pharisees, which were like shifting sands. Jesus called the crowd to put their trust in his truth, which came from God, the same God they knew from the Old Testament. In the parable, the wise man builds his house on the rock. Jesus took advantage of his setting, and this statement would have made sense to all the locals. In Galilee, a man building a house on a rock foundation would not have to dig far, and sometimes did not have to dig at all. A Jewish audience would immediately know the rock refers to God. The Old Testament refers to God as the rock numerous times because the metaphor illustrates the strength, security and stability of the Lord (see Deuteronomy 32:4, 1 Samuel 2:2, 2 Samuel 22:3, Psalm 18:2 and Isaiah 17:10).

“And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock.” ~Matthew 7:25

What Jesus describes in Matthew 7:25 is your typical Galilean autumn storm. Most often, Galilean autumn storms would cause flash flooding. Galilee can become quite dry in the autumn. The dry ground cannot speedily absorb the torrential downpour, resulting in flash flooding. Not only would the heavy rains themselves cause the land to flood, but the rains would cause nearby rivers to overflow, adding to the floods. Pretty, during these Galilean autumn storms, it would appears as if the waters came from both down and up. Jesus uses 2 action verbs to describe the winds, emphasizing that the winds came from every direction and that suck winds have the power to knock over buildings. Those listening to the story would expect the house to collapse, yet it does not. The Galilean homes built on a rock foundation would survive such storms. In the last independent clause of verse 25, the Greek text emphasizes “stood firm,” but past perfect indicative passive state. This tense emphasizes that the house stood firm because of its rock foundation. Likewise, those who hear the words of Jesus and put them to practice will survive the storms of life, both literally and metaphorically.

“And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.” ~Matthew 7:26,27

The Jewish audience, familiar with the Proverbs, expect Jesus to provide a counter example to contrast the fates (see Proverbs 10:25, 12:7 and 14:11). For this counter example, Jesus describes someone who does not apply his words as a foolish man who builds his house on sand. The Greek word used here for foolish is μωρός (moros), from which we get the English word “moron.” Scholars have attempted to locate where the sandy lands might be, but the consensus seem to be that Jesus means the land that’s not the rock foundation. Notice the words Jesus used to describe the storm that hit the house with the sandy foundation matches the words used to describe the house with the rock foundation. The floods caused by the Galilean autumn storms would wash away sands and destabilize any house built on the sand foundation. While a home built on the rock might receive some wear and tear from the story, a house built on the sand would face utter destruction. Likewise, anyone who does not pay attention to the words of Jesus lead themselves down the road of utter destruction.

In both Christ’s parable and my re-telling of Christ’s parable, the reader will see the main characters had many similarities. Both men wanted to build a house. Both men got a house which looked ready to move into and settle. Both men might have even used the same design and the same materials to build the house. The variance, however, was the foundation. That variance resulted in impacting the men differently. When the storms came, the wise man still had a house, but the foolish man had a pile of rubble where the house one stood. To bring the parable up to its meaning, in the same way, multiple will hear the words of Jesus numerous times. The only thing separating those people is whether they apply, or do, those words.

Rabbis during the time of Jesus actually debated if hearing or doing was more importance. Although the consensus seemed to be both hearing and doing, a lot of them actually concluded hearing was more important than doing. They figured that a believer cannot do unless the hear, and thus, hearing had to be more important. Jesus, however, says contrary. If someone hears his teaching, he or she now has a duty to follow them. Perhaps Jesus might have intended to call out the Pharisees nearby, who knew what the Law had to say, but they did not obey it. If I may roughly paraphrase the words of commentator A.T. Robinson, “If a Christian wants to live dangerously, the Christian should listen to sermons with no intention of following them.”

Readers tend to think of the storms representing hardships in life, and rightfully so, but the storms could also represent God’s justice. Think about it. In the parable, those who built their home on the rock find themselves rewarded with a safe and secure home during storms, while those who build their house on the sand find themselves cursed with a destroyed house. In the same way, everybody who hears and does the words of Jesus will find themselves blessed on the day of judgment, while everyone hears the words of Jesus and does not do them will find themselves cursed. In the end, at the final judgment, it will all come down to what God thinks, not what other people think, nor what we think of ourselves. Therefore, the best application of this parable is to prepare ourselves for the final judgment by doing what Jesus has taught us.

While the final judgment will be the last and greatest judgment of all, the Christian should not focus solely the great, final judgment that will come in the future. Judgment can happen in the present, just as much as it will in the future. Judgment will sometimes come from God, but judgment can also come in forms from the world and from life in general. Until the day of the great, final, judgment, the Christian should interpret the storms on the trials and tribulations that will lead up the eschaton. The trials and tribulations, although small in comparison to the great, final judgment, will prepare and test the Christian for the great, final judgment. Those who deny their faith when the trials and tribulations on this earth come will not pass the great, final judgment. Those who will survive the trials and tribulations of life, as well as the great, final judgement, are those who heard the words of Jesus and put them into practice. Just like in the parable, many will hear the words of Jesus, and many will go through trials, tribulation and judgment. Those who put the words of Jesus into practice will survive all trials, tribulations and judgments, but those who did not practice Christ’s words seal their fate. And what’s the number 1 test and trial? Time. False apostles, prophets and teachers stop speaking of the faith in a matter of time, but the true children of God live act out the Word of God until their final breath.

This parable teaches Christians 3 lessons.

First, the parable leaves Christians to ask themselves, “What do we really believe?” Clearly, this parable teaches that true belief doesn’t simply profess. Belief does not simply parrot the words of Jesus, either. True belief leads the believer to act. If believers really believe something, it will cause the believer to act in a certain way. If Christians proclaim the Lord has omnipotent, or all-power, Christians should depend on him when they feel powerless, rather than on their own strength. If Christians proclaim God as omnibenevolent, or all-good, Christians should blame him for when evil happens in their life. If Christians act contrary to their doctrine, or don’t act at all, do they really believe their doctrine?

Second, this parable instructs Christians to work hard on their faith. I took this parable of out Matthew because most Christians recognize the parable from Matthew, but Luke also records Jesus teaching this parable during his Sermon on the Level Plain. While the two variations of the parable have slight differences (some of which probably account to the location), one sticks out in particular. Luke records Jesus mentioning that the wise man dug deep into his foundation on the rock. Foundations take hard work to build. When the bedrock of Galilee sits on or near the surface, to make it function as a sturdy foundation, the builder has to dig deep into it. One of my ancient sources comes from a Greek historian. He records that once he visited an Arab man in Galilee. The Arab man knew of the earthquakes and floods that hit the land, so he dig 10 meters (or 30 feet) deep into the bedroom to make sure the pillars would not move during a natural disaster. The Greek historian looked on in amazement, not at the elegance of the pillars, but rather, at the how deep the Arab man dug just to make sure the pillars stood still. I understand this amazement. I assisted on an archaeological dig when I visited Israel. For this archaeological dig, I had to wake up at 3:00 a.m. to get ready for a dig at 4:00 a.m. Just like a typical work shift, I ended at noon. An archaeological dig need to happen so early in the morning because the sun is brutally unforgiving. Temperatures could easily rise 100 degrees Fahrenheit by noon. I carried around a half gallon jug of water every day, and every day, I finished it by the end of the day. Even with an awning over the dig site, working outside, even washing pottery, becomes unbearable. This is the 21^st century, with digital alarm clocks and light bulbs. Imagine living in Galilee in the 1^st century A.D. Digging requires the sunlight to see, so the digger of a foundation has work in the heat of sun. The builder faces temptation to build in the sand because of ease. The builder has to spend less time in the sun and doesn’t have work as building his home on a sandy foundation. The rock foundation requires the builder to spend all day out in the hot sun and requires extra work. As the parable demonstrates, however, the hard work pays off in the long run because it creates the house that stands firm in the storms.

Do Christians work that hard at their faith? Human nature tends to lean to easy route, but the Bible calls Christians to move than the easy route. Jesus did not take the easy route, but instead, he took the route to cross. As Christians, the Bible calls Christians to follow the path of Jesus. Christians must not succumb to the easy route. As the parable shows, the easy route leads to shaky foundations in the faith. On the flip side, the Christians who work hard on their faith will find themselves on the firm foundation of Jesus. The new nature the Holy Spirit provides all Christians the strength to endure these hardships. May Christians embrace this gift the Holy Spirit has given them to build up their faith.

For the 3^rd application, if someone asks for a one-word summary this meaning of this parable, the answer is “Choose.” If someone asks for a two-word summary this meaning of this parable, the answer is, “Actively choose.” I believe this parable teaches that if you’re not on the foundation of the rock, that automatically places you on the sand. Unless you actively choose to listen and follow the words of Jesus, then by default, you face utter destruction. If you have not actively chosen Jesus, I urge you to do so, confessing your sins and believing in Jesus. If you have actively chosen, trust in Jesus to help you stand firm during hardships and judgments.

The Parable of Virgil and the Doughnut Shop (Matthew 24:45-51)

Virgil was a young adult who worked at Delectable Donuts. Virgil has worked at other fast food restaurants and other retail jobs before, so in terms of dealing with customers and co-workers alike, Delectable Donuts did not feel any different from the other jobs. Delectable Donuts differed greatly, however, in the hours Virgil worked. Naturally, as a doughnut shop, Delectable Donuts opened at 5 a.m., so every morning commuter could grab a breakfast doughnut before driving to work. In order for the shop to open for customers at 5 a.m., the 1^st shift employees had to report to work at 4:00 a.m. In order for Virgil get ready and drive to work, Virgil had to wake up at 3:00 a.m. When Virgil took the job, he thought to himself, “I can do 3:00 a.m. I’m a night owl. 3:00 a.m. is just late at night.” Virgil came to realize that 3:00 a.m. was not late at night, it was really early in the morning, and Virgil was definitely not a morning person. He hated having to wake up so early in the morning, so much he struggled to wake up every morning. He even had to set 12 alarms! Needing to pay some bills, and having job security, Virgil got comfortable and stayed with the job.

Every Monday at noon, as the shifts changed, Mr. Mogavero, Virgil’s boss at Delectable Donuts, would have a weekly meeting with all his employees. Virgil never understood why Mr. Mogavero insisted on having meetings. They were always “fiscal year” this and “weekly revenue” that. Virgil did not know why he needed to know about these things. As long as he got his paycheck, he was content. This meeting, however, would have an impact on Virgil’s life. “Finally,” Mr. Mogavero concluded, “our beloved janitor Mike Kingston has put in his two-weeks notice because he has decided the times has come to retire. Let’s give him a round of applause for such diligent work.” The employees slowly began clap, including Virgil. They didn’t understand why they had to clap for someone not present. “With that being said,” Mr. Mogavero continued, “I need to find a new janitor to take his place. Since I prefer to promote from within, I will post a sign-up sheet on my office door for anyone who would to apply for the job. As the janitor, you report to work at 8:00 p.m. After you help 2^nd shift close shop, you will spend the first half of your shift cleaning up for the day, from cleaning the dishes and pans to wiping down tables and mopping floors. For the second half of your shift, you will begin prep work for the next work day, so when 1^st shift comes in, they can start cooking. Then you will clock out at 4:30 a.m. Since the janitor has no supervisor watching him, the employee must have good self-efficacy, meaning he or she must motive himself or herself to execute the tasks at hand. Oh, and for working such awful hours, I will give you a dollar raise.” Virgil’s ears perked up at that last sentence. Virgil had only received nickel raises or dime raises, not whole dollar raises. Virgil thought to himself, “I could really use that raise to help me with my bills and debts. Besides, those hours are more like the night owl hours I was looking for. And I’m pretty sure I have good self-eff…self-effeff…self-effeffeff…that thing that Mr. Mogavero said.”

After the meeting, Virgil marched up to Mr. Mogavero’s office, and he signed up for an interview, with his name on the top line. On Tuesday morning, Mr. Mogavero interviewed him first. Virgil felt like the interview went well, but just in case, he worked extra hard on Wednesday and Thursday, so Mr. Mogavero could see on his patrol of the kitchen he indeed worked hard. By golly, it worked! On Friday, Mr. Mogavero called Virgil in his office to inform Virgil he got the job. He would report at 8:00 p.m. on Monday to train with Mike Kingston during his last week of employment.

Virgil did report to work on Monday at 8:00, where he met Mike Kingston. Virgil had seen Mike Kingston in passing at his shift start up, but he had never gotten to know him. While Mike seemed nice and kind, he came off as peculiar to Virgil. He always had to constantly move, and he always had to find work, even to the point of inventing work for himself. Virgil played along, but he definitely planned on making changes when he took on the role full-time. The week went by quickly. Before Virgil knew it, Mike handed him the keys, and now he officially took the role as the janitor of Delectable Donuts.

The next Monday Virgil reported to work at 8:00 p.m. He helped 2^nd shift wrap up, and as the last employee walked out, he locked the doors. Virgil stood all alone in the doughnut shop. He began working right away…and he found himself done the clean-up by 10:00 p.m. Virgil didn’t remember the work going so quickly when two of them worked the job. Perhaps as an older gentleman, Mr. Kingston worked slower and took longer. Virgil decided to take lunch early, but that only killed a half hour. He thought about starting prep early, but he didn’t want to do it too early. So he took a seat in the eating area, pulled out his phone and began scrolling on Facebook. When he got to the end of his news feed, he switched to Twitter. When he got to the end of Twitter, he switched to Instagram. When he got to end of Instagram, he cycled back around to Facebook and repeat the process. Unfortunately, no one really updated their social media at midnight on a weekday, but it really didn’t matter because soon Virgil’s phone would run out of battery life. Virgil tried to pass the time by figuring out various ways to count the ceiling tiles (72 to be exact), but that quickly bored him. Virgil began the prep work, but he paced himself, stretching out his time, and even then, he barely made it to the end of his shift.

The next day, Tuesday, Virgil came prepared. He brought phone charger. He downloaded music streaming apps like Pandora and Spotify. He figured out how to hook his phone up to the shop speakers via Bluetooth, so he could stop listening to the awful elevator music Mr. Mogavero insisted playing in the shop and instead listen to his favor rap and hip-hop beats. He downloaded a Kindle and Nook app, so he could read books. He downloaded Netflix and Hulu, so he could watch movies and television shows. Now Virgil could better pace himself by giving himself multiple breaks, and now Virgil would never face boredom. The following day, Wednesday, Virgil brought in his Nintendo Switch. He was grateful Nintendo had invented a portable console because now he could get caught up on the latest video games. Now, between listening to music, reading books, playing games and watching movies and televisions shows, Virgil had a comfortable pace at work.

Soon, Virgil would become comfortable at work, too comfortable. See, Virgil enjoyed all this new-found free time. The best part was he was on the clock, so he got paid for his free time! He wished he could free up more time on his shift. Before he knew it, he did figure out how to get more free time. After locking up, he would get his work done as quickly as possible, so he could have as much free time as possible. He even figured the absolute latest he could start prep work to make sure he looked busy when everyone on 1^st shift arrived for work. Virgil thought he was getting away with it, but he wasn’t as smooth as he thought. Mr. Mogavero had notice dust collecting on the ceiling fans, dirt swirling on the floors, the tables stick, and the dishes had a residue on all of them. The shop never got this messy with Mike Kingston as janitor. Mr. Mogavero decided the time had come to give Virgil a surprise audit.

On a random night, Mr. Mogavero got in his car and began driving to his doughnut shop. As he turned onto the road of his doughnut shop, he could hear the loud pounding of his bass. “Wow,” Mr. Mogavero thought to himself, “I can’t believe how busy the club can get on a weekday night to open for business.” To Mr. Mogavero’s surprise, the loud, thumping sound did not come from the club, but from his beloved doughnut shop! Mr. Mogavero quickly parked his car in the shop’s parking lot and barged through door. “VIRGIL!” he yelled, but he did not see Virgil in the eating area. He barged through the door to the kitchen. “VIRGIL!” he screamed, but he could not find Virgil in the kitchen. Searching for him in the shop, Mr. Mogavero noticed the light in his office turned on. Mr. Mogavero swung open the door, and there was Virgil, sitting in his boss’s leather office chair, bobbing his head to the music while playing his Nintendo Switch. “VIRGIL!” Mr. Mogavero shouted at the top of his lungs. Virgil looked up startled. His face turned pale at the sight of his fuming boss. Before he could get out the three words “I can explain…” his boss shouted three sentence that would impact his life. “GET OUT OF HERE! YOU’RE FIRED! I DON’T EVER WANT TO SEE YOUR FACE AGAIN!”

What you have just read is what I call The Parable of Virgil and the Doughnut Shop. This is a 21^st century version of a parable Jesus told in the 1^st century. Back while in seminary, my preaching professor taught us that when teaching a parable of Jesus, a preacher should re-tell the parable in a 21^st century context. I agree with his teaching. All the parable Jesus taught Jesus extremely contextualized, so his open-minded audience would understand the message, while the close-minded audience would not understand. Therefore, Jesus used the 1^st century culture as his context, a context which would make no sense to the modern-day culture in the 21^st century. So preacher should study what Jesus intended the parable to mean, and then teach the parable in a 21^st century cultural context that the audience could comprehend. Still, because I am not an omniscient rabbi, my parable fails in comparison to the Lord’s parable, so let’s understand the original parable in light of the 1^st century context.

Matthew 24:45-51 begins a series of 3 consecutive parables, with first one starting at 24:45 and the last one ending at 25:30. Most Bible translations don’t give this sermon a title, probably because of its short length. The few Bible versions that do give the parable a title have given it a wide array of titles, and none of those titles call it a parable. The Holman Christian Standard Bible calls it “Faithful Service to the Messiah.” The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) names it “The Faithful or Unfaithful Slave.” The Contemporary English Version (CEV) title it “Faithful and Unfaithful Servants.” The New King James Version (NKJV) calls it “Illustration of Two Servants.” At least the NKJV recognizes as an illustration, albeit not a parable.

The commonality among all these titles reveals the structure of the parable. For those interested in the fancy theological terms, theologians call this a dichotomy. In a dichotomy, the listener hears two examples. Based on the attitudes and behaviors of the two characters alone, the listener clearly understands which character plays the good example and which person plays the bad character. Matthew enjoys uses dichotomies. Throughout his Gospel account, you’ll see dichotomies of good examples and bad example. On top of his love for dichotomies, Matthew further strengthens his dichotomies by explicitly emphasizing that the good example receives a reward, but the bad example gets punished. Interesting enough, in this parable, the good example and the bad example both come from the same character! It is as if the parable is saying, “If the servant is a good servant, he will do this, but if the servant is a bad servant, he will do that.”

This parable also appears in Luke, but Luke uses it in a different context. Matthew utilizes the parable to talk about the coming Messianic kingdom, whereas Luke uses the parable to talk about the expectations of a disciple.

Matthew 24:45-51 (ESV)-

⁴⁵ “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his master has set over his household, to give them their food at the proper time? ⁴⁶ Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. ⁴⁷ Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. ⁴⁸ But if that wicked servant says to himself, ‘My master is delayed,’ ⁴⁹ and begins to beat his fellow servants and eats and drinks with drunkards, ⁵⁰ the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know ⁵¹ and will cut him in pieces and put him with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

In Matthew 24:45, Jesus describes the servant as “faithful” and “wise.” Matthew records Greek adjective πιστός (pistis), or faithful, for the first time in his gospel here, but it appears twice in the next chapter. The other adjective, φρόνιμος (phronimos), translated “wise,” appears seven times in the gospel, as opposed to 0 times in Mark, 2 times in Luke and 0 times in John. More specifically φρόνιμος (phronimos), appears 5 times in Matthew 24-25. Therefore, the reader must consider such usage unique to Matthew. The Greek word φρόνιμος (phronimos) might be where the English word “prudence” came from.  Matthew wants to convey that the servant Jesus finds as wise is a servant who is both intelligent and sensible, able to judge and determine how to use practice his wisdom. Some have suggested the servant talked about represents the disciples. Just as the master placed this servant in authority over the servants, the disciples, who become the apostles, would have leadership authority over the first century church. The Luke parallel proves such thinking incorrect, however, since in the Luke passage, Peter asks, “Is this parable just for us or for everyone?” and the answer Jesus gives hints the parable applies to everyone.

In the 1^st century A.D., a wealth head of house could have several slaves. In a wealthy home, the term “household” would not simply refrain to the family. The household includes everyone in the house, including the servants. When Jesus says “household,” he probably meant the servants, thus making the faithful and wise servant the head servant of the household. When a household had several slaves, a master would commonly set aside a slave as a manager or steward. As seen in the passage, the head servant distributed the food portions to his servants as one of his chief jobs. What an honor for the servant to work in this role! The master would only put someone he esteemed greatly to take charge of what his heart valued most. To put a servant in change of it all, the master must have trusted this servant. Backing us out of the parable and back into the 1^st century AD context Jesus taught this parable in, Jesus might also begin revealing the meaning of the parable already. In both Galatians and Ephesians, Paul calls the church a household. Perhaps Jesus already hints the servants refer to Christian. Indeed, God has entrusted the church and the kingdom of God to Christians, he expects us to practice good stewardship when handling it. To assume the that servant placed over the household is a pastor, however, would probably be taking it too far.

In Matthew 24:46, Jesus answers the rhetorical question he presents in the previous verse. Jesus calls the faithful and wise servant blessed, the same blessed Jesus uses in the Beatitudes.

Matthew 24:47 begins with Jesus saying, “Truly I say to you” or “I tell you the truth.” This phrase only appears in the gospels, only used by Jesus, to lay certainty a divine truth. The faithful and wise servant is put over all the master’s possessions, everything he owns, even up to his property. The reward makes sense. Since the master saw he could trust his servant with a partial portion of his property, he now feels comfortable putting the servant in charge of much more.

As Matthew 24:47 ends, so closes the good example of the good. If you haven’t made the connections yet, the master is the Lord, and the servants are his people, the Christians. Jesus has entrusted the kingdom of God on earth to the Christians. The faithful and wise Christian is the Christian who faithfully carries the will of God and advances the kingdom. The faithful and wise Christian constantly thinks about the Lord’s work. The faithful and wise Christian desires to glorify God in all aspects of life. Just like the servant put over his fellow servants, the Christian leader serves those below him more than uses his power above him. Upon the Lord’s return, the good servant will receive a reward for his faithful and wise actions.

In Matthew 24:48, Jesus seems to talk about the same servant, but now he calls the servant a wicked servant. The Greek word for wicked, κακός (kakos), occurs only 3 times in Matthew, despite a common word throughout the New Testament. The Greek text literally reads that the wicked servant “says in his heart.” In Biblical times, people thought thoughts originated from the heart, just like today we associate the heart with feeling, despite numerous research affirming it only pumps blood. The wicked servant thinks in his heart his master is delayed. A wealthy man in the 1^st century A.D. could own properties many miles apart. With the traveling conditions of the day, anything could prevent someone from coming home on time. Something has held his master up from returning at the expected time, so the servant has much more time away from his master. Temptation sets in to act differently than his commands. He plans that he will begin his work closer to the time of the master’s return. Until then, he will act as he pleases.

In Matthew 24:49, the reader sees how the wicked servant’s think impacts his actions. He no longer sees himself as the head servant, but rather, he thinks of himself as the master. Instead of using his new-found power to help his fellow servants, he uses it to abuse them. Beating the servants does not mean that the servant gets into fights with other servants. As the servant left in charge, this servant could bestow any punishment he saw fit, including beating, the maximum punishment. The wicked servant would abuse this power and mistreat his fellow servants. The compound Greek word σύνδουλος (syndoulos), translated “fellow servant,” only appears outside of Matthew in Colossians and Revelation. In Colossians and Revelation, σύνδουλος (syndoulos) refers to believers. Therefore, Matthew probably had in mind the same meaning. If the master found out about the severe beatings, he would feel enraged. As much as the 21^st century world would hate to think of people as property, the 1^st century world would have seen a managing servant beating fellow servants as a mistreatment of property. The master would personally investigate the beatings to see if the punishment fit.

The wicked servant also abuses his power by indulging himself and drinking with drunkards. In general, 1^st century culture frowned upon drunkenness. Masters expected their servants to be sober always, so they may serve always. The sentence structure does not explicitly make the wicked servant a drunkard, but the context implies he has become like his drunkard friends.

In Matthew 24:50, the reader observes that the wicked servant has trapped himself. He expects his master to come back at a much later time, so he becomes lax, so lax he lulls himself into a false sense of security. Because of his relaxed attitude, the wicked servant does not prepare for his master’s return. He has no excuse when the master finally returns.

In Matthew 24:51, the master has two punishments set aside for such a wicked servant. First, the master will διχοτομέω (dichotomeo) the servant, most commonly translated “cut into pieces.” During the first century A.D., only the worst people received such a violent death penalty for the most heinous crimes. While cutting a disobedient servant to pieces might sound extreme, Jesus conveys to his audience the severity of mishandling the kingdom of God. Second, the master assigns him to a place with the hypocrites, where people weep and teeth gnash. For Matthew, no one can receive a worse title than “hypocrite.” The title fits the wicked servant, for the opposite of a hypocrisy is sincerity, which is exactly what a faithful servant is. Therefore, the punishment fits the wicked servant. Matthew wants his audience to know this place houses the worst of the worst, including wicked servants. Together, the listener of the parable understands the unprepared servants receives the worst of punishments for his wicked behavior. The hearer of the parable comprehends the wicked servant has received pain and loss for his behavior. The weeping and gnashing of teeth conveys this truth, two reactions someone might have for extreme loss or extreme pain.

Again, let’s make sure we understand what the parable means regarding the wicked servant. More condemning than the wicked servant’s destructive habits is his thinking that he can get away with because of his master’s absence. The wicked servant is somebody who has not been a good steward of the kingdom of God. He or she has abused his or her power, and he or shall has mistreated other people. More destruction than the wicked servant’s hands is his heart. Quite the opposite of the faithful and wise servant, the wicked servant will receive the worst punishment for such actions. In the same way, if there is anything worse than sin, it is unconfessed and unrepentant sin. What condemns humanity worse than sin is unconfessed and unrepentant sin. This is what brings down the wrath of God.

Clearly, the moral of the story is that a faithful and wise Christian anticipates the return of the Lord Jesus, their master. But what does it mean to anticipate the return of Jesus? Let’s look at the parable again. Notice that the servant does not sit at the door and wait to greet him warning. Note that the servant does not try to calculate or figure out when the master will return. If anything, what gets the wicked servant in trouble is that he figures he knows when the master will return, so he takes advantage of the time away from his master! The difference between the faithful and wise servant and the wicked servant is their attitude and behavior. Therefore, the Christian can conclude that anticipation for the return of Christ does not mean enthusiastic speculation, but rather, it means faithfully serving the kingdom of God.

No one warned me that receiving a Masters in Divinity will make everyone see me as the expert in all things Biblical, religious, spiritual and theological. I get a lot of questions and a lot of requests. Requests can begin with, “Read this book,” “listen to this podcast,” or “watch this video,” but all the requests end with “and tell me what you think.” Most of these questions deal with the subjects of spiritual disciplines or ecclesiology (how to do church), but every now I will get fielded questions about eschatology (Biblical prophecy on end times). When I get those end time requests, I tell that person, “Alright, I will read this book/listen to this podcast/watch this video, but I want you to do something for me. I want to you find the 16^th season of The Simpsons, either On Demand or DVD. I want to watch the episode called ‘Thank God It’s Doomsday’ in exchange.” Now I want to quickly add a disclaimer by saying I only say this to mature and strong Christians. I wouldn’t say this to weak or immature Christians because the episode might come off to them as offensive for making fun of Christians. In reality, it more so makes fun of Christians who study end times too intensely. Just like the foolish and wicked servant in the parable, Homer Simpson constructs some bogus math equation to predict the rapture. I want Christians to watch this just so they can understand how they look to non-Christians (and maybe Christians) too when they try to predict the end times.

More specifically, I want them to watch it for a line Homer says in the middle of the episode. As Homer Simpson prophecies the end times, wearing his sandwich boards, TV anchorman Kent Brockman interviews Homer. Kent asks Homer, “Homer, what turned you from sad drunk to mad monk.” Homer answers, “Here's my angle- there's no way in God's Heaven I should get into God's Heaven, but maybe He'll let me in, if I warn others the Apocalypse is coming, as I previously shouted.” I want Christians to hear this line because I want them to think about their intent and purpose of prophesying the end times. Matthew 24:36 aside, even if someone somehow could figure out the perfect timeline for the rapture, the tribulation and the millennial kingdom, what good would it bring? Like Homer Simpson, do they expect to have something special with God if they create that perfect timeline? In human terms, friendships don’t strengthen when one friend goes telling the other friend’s deepest secrets. They weaken! How much more for the divine! Someone might argue, “Well, wouldn’t it help evangelism?” I have always felt like using end times for evangelism is like someone selling fire insurance going through someone’s house, pointing out all the fire hazards, proclaiming a great fire is inevitable. In a generation that prefers to see Christianity as a relationship and not a religion, is the person scared by the eminent tribulation really in a relationship with Jesus, or are they submitting to a dictator in fear of facing punishment?

Matthew 24:45-51 exposes why the Father wants to keep the day and the hour unknown. If Christians evangelized the gospel with the exact dates and times of the rapture and tribulation, it would create a bunch of foolish and wicked servants. They would take advantage of the time the Lord was away. They would indulge in sin and abuse others. Then, just before the Lord returns, they would clean up their act, so everything looks perfect when the Lord returns. This leads to the other error that Christians commit when they focus too much on eschatology. They think about the future more than the present. Jesus concerns himself with both the present and the future, and Christians should follow in those footsteps. Once again, I point out to you that what gets the wicked servant in trouble is that he thinks he know when his master will return. The faithful and wise servant focuses on the tasks the master put in charge of him. The faithful and wise servant concerns himself more with what the master find himself doing when the master returns rather than the date and time when the master returns. Christians fail theologically, in both doctrine and application, when they focus too much on Christ’s return. Christians theologically succeed when they concentrate on doing Jesus taught them. If Christians want to live as faithful and wise servants, they think about what to do until Jesus returns more than thinking about when Jesus will actually return.

As mentioned earlier, this passage does also appear in the Gospel according to Luke. Luke ends the passage in a different way. In Luke 12:48b, Luke writes, “Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.” It’s a Bible verse many Christians know, but probably more people know the a very similar saying spoken by Ben Parker in the Spider Man movie: “With great power comes great responsibility.” As Christians, we have received so much responsibility from Jesus. We have so much to do, we can’t waste time trying to figure out at unknown date and time. Let us be found doing the will of Jesus, so we too can receive the title of faithful and wise servants.