Matthew 20 - The Landowner, The Steward, and The Blind Men

[I've been hearing something and trying to do an experiment as a result. Chapters and verses were added centuries after the books of the Bible were written. Other divisions, like storyline breaks, were added even later. None of these divisions are particularly inspired by God. Some may even be misplaced (i.e. Joshua 6 should start at 5:13)They are human tools for dividing the material for easier acquisition. Originally, these books (sometimes multiples books, like Samuel-Kings) were written as unified stories, with threads of narrative tied together by a common goal and common themes. So, my experiment has been to look for connections within each chapter, and sometimes across chapters. Chapter 20 of Matthew is a great example. It contains four segments that we normally read as if they were just shoved together for no reason. But, what if they are inter-related? What if there are links between them, reasons they were included in Matthew close to each other? There are few strong narrative breaks in Matthew's Gospel. Rather, he presents a flow of stories and teachings. What if Matthew 20 fits into the larger section of the Kingdom of Heaven as a sub-section with the common theme related to God's gift of sight?]

[Another thought: When Jesus begins a parable, it seems he normally (I haven't checked them all) introduces it with the character the parable is really about. For example, He begins the story we know as the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15) with "There was a man who had two sons..." When we read the story, we learn that the most important character in the story is the Father, not his sons. We should call it something like The Parable of the Forgiving Father. Today's reading begins with The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (according to my Bible's divisions), but it should properly be called The Parable of the Generous Landowner. The Landowner is the most important and principle character.]

[As always, these are reflections, ramblings, unorganized thoughts. Read the chapter itself and feel free to toss whatever I say that doesn't make sense. These brackets [] indicate thoughts I've added to clarify what I wrote in my journal.]

This is a familiar parable, and it seems easy to find our place in it. Were we hired (saved) early or late? Either way, The Landowner (GOD) gives us "whatever is right." Whenever we were called, the whole thing depends on the "landowner who went out... to hire laborers." He is generous. He keeps going out. And, for some reason he instructs his steward (Jesus) to pay the last first.

Now, this steward describes his stewardship to his followers: betrayal, suffering, death, and resurrection. This is the means of paying "whatever is right." Those whose eye is evil because the landowner is so unfairly generous (v.15) and those who see rightly will both get whatever the Landowner deems is right.

The problem is that we are all blind. Now, a blind man cannot see at all. His vision is neither evil nor right. Only after he is given sight can he respond to what he sees. Only after a laborer has been hired can "whatever is right" be determined. [This is the reality of the Gospel: No one can be saved unless they hear the Good News (they are blind), but once they hear the Good News (being 'called') they must respond. They will either reject it (evil eyes) or accept it (right sight). Perhaps this is where "many are called, but few are chosen" fits in? Neutrality is impossible.] In other words, God shows us Jesus so our hearts [our eyes]will be known, whether our restored sight is evil or right.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Caption Contest!

Gone

100 Days of Micah!