Matthew 21 Parable Application to Presbyterian Life

Matthew 21 contains a series of parables and confrontations that highlight Jesus' authority and the rejection he faced from the Jewish religious leaders. The chapter opens with Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem, followed by his cleansing of the temple, and then moves into direct challenges to his authority by the chief priests and elders ^[9]. Within this context, Jesus delivers three parables: the Parable of the Two Sons (Matthew 21:28-32), the Parable of the Wicked Tenants (Matthew 21:33-46), and the Parable of the Wedding Feast (Matthew 22:1-14). These parables collectively expose the guilt of those who rejected the Messiah and forfeited their privileged position as God's chosen people ^[9].

The Parable of the Two Sons (Matthew 21:28-32) is presented as follows in the ESV: "What do you think? A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ And he answered, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he changed his mind and went. And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. And even when you saw it, you did not afterward change your minds and believe him."

This parable directly follows the confrontation where the chief priests and elders questioned Jesus' authority (Matthew 21:23-27). Jesus turns their question back on them, using the parable to illustrate their hypocrisy and unbelief. The parable's immediate literary context emphasizes John the Baptist's significance, as Jesus connects the religious leaders' failure to believe John with their rejection of him ^[9]. The historical setting is Jerusalem during Jesus' final week before his crucifixion, a period marked by escalating tension between Jesus and the Jewish religious establishment.

The key terms in this parable include "vineyard," "sons," and "will of his father." The "vineyard" is a common biblical metaphor for Israel, often representing God's people or his kingdom (e.g., Isaiah 5:1-7). The "sons" represent different groups within Israel. The "will of his father" signifies obedience to God's commands and acceptance of his messengers. The parable highlights the contrast between outward profession and genuine obedience. The first son initially refuses but later repents and obeys, while the second son professes obedience but fails to act.

A major exegetical decision in this passage revolves around identifying the groups represented by the two sons. Jesus explicitly states that "the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you" (Matthew 21:31). This identifies the first son with those who were considered sinners by society but responded to John the Baptist's message of repentance and believed. The second son represents the religious leaders—the chief priests and elders—who outwardly professed adherence to God's law but rejected John's message and, by extension, Jesus' authority ^[9]. Their verbal assent ("I go, sir") was not matched by their actions.

The range of interpretations for this parable consistently focuses on the theme of repentance and genuine obedience versus hypocritical profession. John Calvin, in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, discusses the nature of God's call, distinguishing between a general call and a special call that takes root in the heart ^[4]. While not directly addressing this parable, his emphasis on the internal illumination of the Spirit and the word taking deep root aligns with the idea that true belief involves more than outward acknowledgment. The first son's change of mind and subsequent action demonstrate this internal transformation. Calvin also speaks of a "contrite and humble spirit" as essential for being exalted by God, contrasting it with those who will be humbled by God's mighty hand ^[8]. This resonates with the tax collectors and prostitutes, who, in their humility, responded to John's call, unlike the proud religious leaders.

Matthew Henry, a Nonconformist commentator, in his commentary on Mark 12:1 (which parallels Matthew 21:33, the subsequent parable of the wicked tenants), notes that those who enjoy the privileges of the visible church have a "vineyard let out to them" from which "rent is justly expected" ^[6]. While this comment is on the next parable, it underscores the expectation of fruitfulness and obedience from those entrusted with God's blessings. In the Parable of the Two Sons, the "work in the vineyard" represents the expected obedience to God's will. Henry also comments on the purpose of a candle not being hidden but set on a candlestick, implying that those who are good ought to consider their obligations to do good and bring forth fruit ^[7]. This further supports the idea that outward profession without corresponding action is insufficient.

Augustine, in his Homilies on the Gospels, often emphasizes the importance of genuine conversion and the remission of sins ^[3]. While not directly on this parable, his broader theological framework would support the idea that the first son, through his repentance and obedience, demonstrated a true conversion that the second son lacked. Augustine also discusses the concept of receiving blessedness, noting that all Christians, regardless of when they are called, will receive together ^[5]. This idea of inclusion, even for those called "at the eleventh hour," aligns with the acceptance of tax collectors and prostitutes into the kingdom, despite their past lives.

The parable functions in tradition as a stark reminder that God values sincere repentance and obedience over outward religious observance or verbal assent. It challenges those who might consider themselves righteous based on their position or profession, while neglecting the true demands of God's will. The parable serves as a warning against hypocrisy and self-deception, emphasizing that actions speak louder than words in demonstrating one's commitment to God. It also highlights God's grace in accepting those who, despite initial resistance, ultimately turn to him in repentance. The cross-references provided by the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge for Matthew 21:32, such as 2 Peter 2:21 ("For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them"), further underscore the importance of not only knowing but also following God's path ^[2]. Similarly, Romans 10:21, which speaks of God stretching out his hands to a disobedient and contrary people, resonates with the persistent rejection by the religious leaders despite God's repeated calls ^[1].

The application of this parable to Presbyterian life, or any Christian tradition, lies in its call for authentic faith expressed through obedience. It challenges individuals and the church as a whole to examine whether their verbal affirmations of faith are matched by their actions. It warns against the danger of religious formalism where outward adherence to doctrines or practices replaces genuine submission to God's will. The parable encourages humility and repentance, reminding believers that God welcomes those who, like the first son, initially stray but ultimately turn back to him.