[And He Walks With Me] Matthew 20
1-16 Building on the thoughts of 19:27-30, Jesus explained to his disciples how the kingdom of God works using a parable. The point of the parable is that, for those who work the longest and sacrifice the most to follow Jesus, the reward of eternal life will be worth at least as much as they have given up. So also, those who come the latest and sacrifice the least will receive the same eternal life. It is tempting to think this is unfair to those who gave up the most, and technically, that is true because not even the greatest saint deserves eternal life. Because of sin, humans can receive eternal life only by the grace of Jesus (Ephesians 2:8-10), and grace is by definition unfair because the recipient can never provide something of equal value. Such is the generosity of God’s grace! Even so, it is tempting to think of those who come to faith later or give up less as having a lower position in the kingdom of God. This, however, is not the case as God’s grace serves as a great equalizer. In his kingdom, those who come last and contribute the least are given the same reward as those who come first and contribute the most. Therefore, the last will be first, and the first last.
2 One denarius was considered a fair wage for a typical day of work. The typical workday began at sunrise and ended at sunset, making the work day range from 11 hours in December to 15 hours in June and July. The grape harvest, which was when vineyards required the most laborers, began in July and ended in October.
3-6 Even at the winter solstice, nine in the morning (CSB) was a late start. Like many cultures around the world, ancient Jews told time relative to sunrise. In fact, a more literal translation of the underlying Greek phrase would be about the third hour (KJV). Sunrise in Jerusalem ranges from 5:42 am on the summer solstice to 6:37 am on the winter solstice. This was averaged to approximately 6 am. Given that the typical workday began at sunrise, depending on the time of year, the workers who went into the field in vs 4 had already missed at least 20% of the workday. Similarly, those who joined the workers at noon and about three missed at least 40% and 60% of the workday, respectively. Given that sunset in Jerusalem ranges from about 7:45 pm on the summer solstice and about 5:00 pm on the winter solstice, those who went into the field at about five certainly worked less than 20% of the workday and could have worked just a few minutes before work was stopped at sunset.
No official explanation is given for these people who are still standing around. It is often presumed that these were lazy or late. However, it is also conceivable that at least some of these workers were finishing the harvest in another field and now returned to pick up additional work,[245] and others may have simply not heard the landowner’s earlier invitations. In fact, at least one commentator suggests that those who were still waiting for work at 5 pm were “desperate enough to remain waiting for” only one-twelfth of a denarius’ worth of work. The median household income in the US is $74,580 per year. Assuming the person works 250 days per year (i.e., 5 days per week for 50 weeks), this equates to $24.86. At any rate, the landowner does not condemn or criticize them. Rather, he bids them in vs 7, You also go into my vineyard.
8-16 As was typical in the first century, the owner of the vineyard paid the workers at the end of the day. What is unusual is that he began with those who came last and ended with those who came first. This resulted in some understandable disappointment among the workers who worked longest and hardest because, when they saw that the last workers each received one denarius, they expected to receive more. This raises the question of why the landowner would pay the workers from last to first. I would suggest he did this because, if the vineyard represents the kingdom of God, then the last workers represent those who were saved as a result of the faithful efforts of the first workers. Therefore, allowing the first workers to see those who came later was akin to allowing the earliest saints see the fruit of their labor. It was another part of their compensation!
16 It is tempting to see Jesus’ statement here as a reversal of the social order, and in some cases, it will be. The proud will be humbled and the humble exalted. However, it could also be interpreted as an equalizing. In the kingdom of heaven, earthly advantages are nullified because justice is perfect and God’s abundant grace is free.
17-19 This is the third time Jesus predicted his death. The first time, in Matthew 16:21-23, he was in Caesarea Philippi, and Peter had just confessed him to be the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Jesus told them he would suffer, be killed, and be raised again in Jerusalem, but it was still far off in both time and place. The second time, in Matthew 17:22-23, they were gathering together in Galilee when Jesus reminded his disciples of this prediction and added that it would be the result of a betrayal. It was closer in both time and place, but it was still some way off. Now, however, they were presently going up to Jerusalem. The time and place were now imminent.
The first time Jesus predicted his death, it was a simple statement that he would suffer and die. The second time, he added the betrayal aspect. This third time, he added that the Gentiles would be involved as well. This was important for two reasons. First, the Jewish authorities could not legally execute someone without Roman approval. Thus, the Gentile involvement suggests that this would not be an illicit mob action but an officially sanctioned execution. Second, it makes Gentiles equally culpable in Christ’s death. The crucifixion was not just a Jewish action; it was done by representatives of all humanity. He also clarified that at least part of the suffering would come in the form of being flogged.
20-28 It is unclear whether James and John asked their mother to approach Jesus on their behalf, or if she was the architect of this encounter. Matthew reports only that she approached him with her sons. Whoever came up with this idea, the request was that these brothers would be guaranteed the two most important positions in Jesus’ kingdom.
22-23 Rather than granting their request, Jesus rebuffs them. He says, first, that they don’t know what [they’re] asking. This misunderstanding clearly comes from their failure to comprehend how radically different Jesus’ kingdom is than the earthly concept. Indeed, the juxtaposition of this request with Jesus’ third prediction of the crucifixion in vss 17-19 is shocking. How did they not understand? Yet, how often do we worship at the foot of the cross on Sunday and pursue prestige and power the rest of the week?
Jesus also asked a rhetorical question: Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink? In essence, he was asking if they were willing to undergo their own arrest, suffering, and death on behalf of others. However, their lack of understanding is on full display when they affirm, We are able. While they would both one day willingly suffer for Christ – James would be martyred in Acts 12:2, and John would be exiled to the penal colony of Patmos before writing Revelation 1:9 – that day was not yet today. Despite what they said here, both James and John would desert Jesus and his cup in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:56).
24-28 The other ten disciples became indignant when they heard what James’ and John’s mother asked Jesus. The source of this indignation was obvious: they each hoped to be most important in Jesus’ kingdom. They each had built a case for why they deserved the position and the others did not. They were just not bold enough to actually ask.
Jesus’ teaching here defines Christian leadership. Contrary to a secular understanding, which seeks greater prominence at the expense of the follower, Christians lead through service. Jesus modeled this in a tangible way when he washed his disciples’ feet in John 13:1-20, and the Church embraced it when the first leaders appointed outside of the apostles were to serve by waiting tables (Acts 6:1-7). Indeed, the church eventually adopted the title diakonos (G1249 διάκονος: deacon), which refers to “a servant, attendant, minister,”[246] for its leaders.
29-34 Mark’s parallel account is found in Mark 10:46-52. It focuses on one of the two blind men, Bartamaeus. It also provides some additional detail about how the blind men were called.
Luke’s parallel account is found in Luke 18:35-42. While Matthew and Mark indicate the encounter happening as Jesus left Jericho, Luke reports that it happened as Jesus approached Jericho.
Once again, Jesus demonstrates the importance of margin and flexibility. When faced with an interruption to his agenda of going up to Jerusalem (vs 17), he did not ignore or grow irritated. Rather, he was moved with compassion and touched their eyes so that they could see. The result is significant: they followed him. Often, the most impactful ministry we can have comes in moments of interruption.
30 Two blind men recognized Jesus as the Son of David, a title with two important implications. First, it was messianic, and second, it identified Jesus as the rightful king of Israel. It is striking that two blind men recognized this while the religious leaders, who prided their figurative ability to see, did not.
[245] Keener and Walton 2016, Matthew 20:3
[246] “G1249 – diakonos – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv)”, n.d.