Matius 13:10-15

13:10 Then ¹  the disciples came to him and said, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” 13:11 He replied, ²  “You have been given ³  the opportunity to know ⁴  the secrets ⁵  of the kingdom of heaven, but they have not. 13:12 For whoever has will be given more, and will have an abundance. But whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. ⁶  13:13 For this reason I speak to them in parables: Although they see they do not see, and although they hear they do not hear nor do they understand. 13:14 And concerning them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:

‘You will listen carefully ⁷  yet will never understand,

you will look closely ⁸  yet will never comprehend.

13:15 For the heart of this people has become dull;

they are hard of hearing,

and they have shut their eyes,

so that they would not see with their eyes

and hear with their ears

and understand with their hearts

and turn, and I would heal them.’ ⁹ 

Matius 13:34-35

The Purpose of Parables

13:34 Jesus spoke all these things in parables to the crowds; he did not speak to them without a parable. 13:35 This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet: ¹⁰ 

“I will open my mouth in parables,

I will announce what has been hidden from the foundation of the world.” ¹¹ 

Matius 21:28-33

The Parable of the Two Sons

21:28 “What ¹²  do you think? A man had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ 21:29 The boy answered, ¹³  ‘I will not.’ But later he had a change of heart ¹⁴  and went. 21:30 The father ¹⁵  went to the other son and said the same thing. This boy answered, ¹⁶  ‘I will, sir,’ but did not go. 21:31 Which of the two did his father’s will?” They said, “The first.” ¹⁷  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, ¹⁸  tax collectors ¹⁹  and prostitutes will go ahead of you into the kingdom of God! 21:32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him. But the tax collectors and prostitutes did believe. Although ²⁰  you saw this, you did not later change your minds ²¹  and believe him.

The Parable of the Tenants

21:33 “Listen to another parable: There was a landowner ²²  who planted a vineyard. ²³  He put a fence around it, dug a pit for its winepress, and built a watchtower. Then ²⁴  he leased it to tenant farmers ²⁵  and went on a journey.

Matius 22:1-14

The Parable of the Wedding Banquet

22:1 Jesus spoke ²⁶  to them again in parables, saying: 22:2 “The kingdom of heaven can be compared to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son. 22:3 He sent his slaves ²⁷  to summon those who had been invited to the banquet, but they would not come. 22:4 Again he sent other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited, “Look! The feast I have prepared for you is ready. ²⁸  My oxen and fattened cattle have been slaughtered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.”’ 22:5 But they were indifferent and went away, one to his farm, another to his business. 22:6 The ²⁹  rest seized his slaves, insolently mistreated them, and killed them. 22:7 The ³⁰  king was furious! He sent his soldiers, and they put those murderers to death ³¹  and set their city ³²  on fire. 22:8 Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but the ones who had been invited were not worthy. 22:9 So go into the main streets and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet.’ 22:10 And those slaves went out into the streets and gathered all they found, both bad and good, and the wedding hall was filled with guests. 22:11 But when the king came in to see the wedding guests, he saw a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 22:12 And he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without wedding clothes?’ But he had nothing to say. ³³  22:13 Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Tie him up hand and foot and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth!’ 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.”

[13:10]  ¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

[13:11]  ² tn Grk “And answering, he said to them.” This construction is somewhat redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation. Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[13:11]  ³ tn This is an example of a “divine passive,” with God understood to be the source of the revelation (see ExSyn 437-38).

[13:11]  ⁴ tn Grk “to you it has been given to know.” The dative pronoun occurs first, in emphatic position in the Greek text, although this position is awkward in contemporary English.

[13:11]  ⁵ tn Grk “the mysteries.”

[13:11]  sn The key term secrets (μυστήριον, musthrion) can mean either (1) a new revelation or (2) a revealing interpretation of existing revelation as in Dan 2:17-23, 27-30. Jesus seems to be explaining how current events develop old promises, since the NT consistently links the events of Jesus’ ministry and message with old promises (Rom 1:1-4; Heb 1:1-2). The traditional translation of this word, “mystery,” is misleading to the modern English reader because it suggests a secret which people have tried to uncover but which they have failed to understand (L&N 28.77).

[13:12]  ⁶ sn What he has will be taken from him. The meaning is that the one who accepts Jesus’ teaching concerning his person and the kingdom will receive a share in the kingdom now and even more in the future, but for the one who rejects Jesus’ words, the opportunity that that person presently possesses with respect to the kingdom will someday be taken away forever.

[13:14]  ⁷ tn Grk “with hearing,” a cognate dative that intensifies the action of the main verb “you will listen” (ExSyn 168-69).

[13:14]  ⁸ tn Grk “look by looking.” The participle is redundant, functioning to intensify the force of the main verb.

[13:15]  ⁹ sn A quotation from Isa 6:9-10. Thus parables both conceal or reveal depending on whether one is open to hearing what they teach.

[13:35]  ¹⁰ tc A few important mss (א* Θ Ë^1,13 33) identify the prophet as Isaiah, a reading that is significantly harder than the generic “prophet” because the source of this prophecy is not Isaiah but Asaph in Ps 78. Jerome mentioned some mss that had “Asaph” here, though none are known to exist today. This problem is difficult because of the temptation for scribes to delete the reference to Isaiah in order to clear up a discrepancy. Indeed, the vast majority of witnesses have only “the prophet” here (א¹ B C D L W 0233 0242 Ï lat sy co). However, as B. M. Metzger points out, “if no prophet were originally named, more than one scribe might have been prompted to insert the name of the best known prophet – something which has, in fact, happened elsewhere more than once” (TCGNT 27). In light of the paucity of evidence for the reading ᾿Ησαΐου, as well as the proclivity of scribes to add his name, it is probably best to consider the shorter reading as authentic.

[13:35]  tn Grk “was spoken by the prophet, saying.” The participle λέγοντος (legontos) is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[13:35]  ¹¹ sn A quotation from Ps 78:2.

[21:28]  ¹² tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:29]  ¹³ tn Grk “And answering, he said.” This is somewhat redundant and has been simplified in the translation. Here the referent (“the boy”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:29]  ¹⁴ tn The Greek text reads here μεταμέλομαι (metamelomai): “to change one’s mind about something, with the probable implication of regret” (L&N 31.59); cf. also BDAG 639 s.v. The idea in this context involves more than just a change of mind, for the son regrets his initial response. The same verb is used in v. 32.

[21:30]  ¹⁵ tn “And he”; here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:30]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “And answering, he said.” This is somewhat redundant and has been simplified in the translation. Here δέ (de) has not been translated. Here the referent (“this boy”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:31]  ¹⁷ tc Verses 29-31 involve a rather complex and difficult textual problem. The variants cluster into three different groups: (1) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. The second son is called the one who does his father’s will. This reading is found in the Western mss (D it). But the reading is so hard as to be nearly impossible. One can only suspect some tampering with the text, extreme carelessness on the part of the scribe, or possibly a recognition of the importance of not shaming one’s parent in public. (Any of these reasons is not improbable with this texttype, and with codex D in particular.) The other two major variants are more difficult to assess. Essentially, the responses make sense (the son who does his father’s will is the one who changes his mind after saying “no”): (2) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. But here, the first son is called the one who does his father’s will (unlike the Western reading). This is the reading found in (א) C L W (Z) 0102 0281 ˹ 33 Ï and several versional witnesses. (3) The first son says “yes” but does not go, and the second son says “no” but later has a change of heart. This is the reading found in B Θ Ë¹³ 700 and several versional witnesses. Both of these latter two readings make good sense and have significantly better textual support than the first reading. The real question, then, is this: Is the first son or the second the obedient one? If one were to argue simply from the parabolic logic, the second son would be seen as the obedient one (hence, the third reading). The first son would represent the Pharisees (or Jews) who claim to obey God, but do not (cf. Matt 23:3). This accords well with the parable of the prodigal son (in which the oldest son represents the unbelieving Jews). Further, the chronological sequence of the second son being obedient fits well with the real scene: Gentiles and tax collectors and prostitutes were not, collectively, God’s chosen people, but they did repent and come to God, while the Jewish leaders claimed to be obedient to God but did nothing. At the same time, the external evidence is weaker for this reading (though stronger than the first reading), not as widespread, and certainly suspect because of how neatly it fits. One suspects scribal manipulation at this point. Thus the second reading looks to be superior to the other two on both external and transcriptional grounds. But what about intrinsic evidence? One can surmise that Jesus didn’t always give predictable responses. In this instance, he may well have painted a picture in which the Pharisees saw themselves as the first son, only to stun them with his application (v. 32).

[21:31]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”

[21:31]  ¹⁹ sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.

[21:32]  ²⁰ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:32]  ²¹ sn The word translated change your minds is the same verb used in v. 29 (there translated had a change of heart). Jesus is making an obvious comparison here, in which the religious leaders are viewed as the disobedient son.

[21:33]  ²² tn The term here refers to the owner and manager of a household.

[21:33]  ²³ sn The vineyard is a figure for Israel in the OT (Isa 5:1-7). The nation and its leaders are the tenants, so the vineyard here may well refer to the promise that resides within the nation. The imagery is like that in Rom 11:11-24.

[21:33]  ²⁴ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

[21:33]  ²⁵ sn The leasing of land to tenant farmers was common in this period.

[22:1]  ²⁶ tn Grk “And answering again, Jesus spoke.” This construction is somewhat redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation.

[22:3]  ²⁷ tn See the note on the word “slave” in 8:9.

[22:4]  ²⁸ tn Grk “Behold, I have prepared my dinner.” In some contexts, however, to translate ἄριστον (ariston) as “dinner” somewhat misses the point. L&N 23.22 here suggests, “See now, the feast I have prepared (for you is ready).”

[22:6]  ²⁹ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[22:7]  ³⁰ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[22:7]  ³¹ tn Grk “he sent his soldiers, destroyed those murderers.” The verb ἀπώλεσεν (apwlesen) is causative, indicating that the king was the one behind the execution of the murderers. In English the causative idea is not expressed naturally here; either a purpose clause (“he sent his soldiers to put those murderers to death”) or a relative clause (“he sent his soldier who put those murderers to death”) is preferred.

[22:7]  ³² tn The Greek text reads here πόλις (polis), which could be translated “town” or “city.” The prophetic reference is to the city of Jerusalem, so “city” is more appropriate here.

[22:12]  ³³ tn Grk “he was silent.”