Matthew 20

Matthew 20:1

I. Concerning Rewards for Labor in the Vineyard (20:1-16) 20:1, 2 This parable, a continuation of the discourse on rewards at the end of chapter 19, illustrates the truth that while all true disciples will be rewarded, the order of rewards will be determined by the spirit in which the disciple served. The parable describes a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers to work in his vineyard. These men contracted to work for a denarius a day, a reasonable wage at that time. Let us say they began to work at 6:00 a.m. 20:3, 4 At 9:00 a.m. the farmer found some other unemployed laborers in the market place. In this case there was no labor-management agreement. They went to work with only his word that he would give them whatever was right. 20:5-7 At noon and at 3:00 p.m. the farmer hired more men on the basis that he would give them a fair wage. At 5:00 p.m. he found more unemployed men. They were not lazy; they wanted work but hadn’t been able to find it. So he sent them into the vineyard without any discussion of pay. It is important to notice that the first men were hired as a result of a bargaining agreement; all the others left the matter of pay to the landowner. 20:8 At the end of the day, the farmer instructed his paymaster to pay the men, beginning with the last hired and working back to the first. (In this way the earliest men hired saw what the others received.) 20:9-12 It was the same pay for allone denarius. The 6:00 a.m. men thought they would receive more, but nothey too got one denarius. They were bitterly resentful; after all, they had worked longer and through the heat of the day. 20:13, 14 In the farmer’s reply to one of them we find the abiding lessons from the parable. First he said, Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours, and go your way. I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. The first bargained for a denarius a day and got the wage agreed on. The others cast themselves on the farmer’s grace and got grace. Grace is better than justice. It is better to leave our rewards up to the Lord than to strike a bargain with Him. 20:15 Then the farmer said, Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things? The lesson, of course, is that God is sovereign. He can do as He pleases. And what He pleases will always be right, just, and fair. The farmer added, Or is your eye evil because I am good? This question exposes the selfish streak in human nature. The 6:00 a.m. men got exactly what they deserved, yet were jealous because the others got the same pay for working fewer hours. Many of us have to admit that it seems a bit unfair to us, too. This only proves that in the kingdom of heaven we must adopt an entirely new kind of thinking. We must abandon our greedy, competitive spirit, and think like the Lord. The farmer knew that all these men needed money, so he paid them according to need rather than greed. No one received less than he deserved, but all received what they needed for themselves and their families. The lesson, according to James Stewart, is that the person who thinks to bargain about final reward will always be wrong, and God’s loving-kindness will always have the last unchallengeable word. The more we study the parable in this light, the more we realize that it is not only fair but eminently beautiful. Those who were hired at 6:00 a.m. should have counted it an added recompense to serve such a wonderful master all day. 20:16 Jesus closed the parable with the words, So the last will be first, and the first last (see Mat_19:30). There will be surprises in the matter of rewards. Some who thought they would be first will be last because their service was inspired by pride and selfish ambition. Others who served out of love and gratitude will be highly honored. Deeds of merit as we thought them, He will show us were but sin; Little acts we had forgotten, He will show us were for Him. Anon

Matthew 20:17

J. Concerning His Death and Resurrection (20:17-19) It is apparent that the Lord was leaving Perea for the trip to Jerusalem via Jericho (see v. 29). Once again He took the twelve disciples aside to explain what would happen after they reached the Holy City. He would be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes an obvious reference to the perfidy of Judas. He would be condemned to death by the leaders of Jewry. Lacking authority to inflict capital punishment, they would turn Him over to the Gentiles (the Romans). He would be mocked, scourged, and crucified. But death would not keep its preyHe would rise again on the third day.

Matthew 20:20

K. Concerning Position in the Kingdom (20:20-28) It is a sad commentary on human nature that, immediately after the third prediction of His passion, His followers were thinking more of their own glory than of His sufferings. Christ’s first prediction of suffering gave rise to Peter’s demur (Mat_16:22); the second was soon followed by the disciples’ questions, Who is the greatest … ? So here, we find the third capped with the ambitious request of James and John. They persistently closed their eyes to warnings of trouble, and opened them only to the promise of gloryso getting a wrong, materialistic view of the Kingdom (Daily Notes of the Scripture Union). 20:20, 21 The mother of James and John came to the Lord asking that her boys might sit on either side of Him in His kingdom. It is to her credit that she wanted her sons near Jesus, and that she had not despaired of His coming reign. But she did not understand the principles upon which honors would be bestowed in the kingdom. Mark says that the sons made the request themselves (Mar_10:35); perhaps they did it at her direction, or perhaps the three of them approached the Lord together. No contradiction is involved. 20:22 Jesus answered frankly that they did not understand what they were asking. They wanted a crown without a cross, a throne without the altar of sacrifice, the glory without the suffering that leads to it. So He asked them pointedly, Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink? We are not left to wonder what He meant by the cup; He had just described it in verses 18 and 19. He must suffer and die. James and John expressed ability to share in His sufferings, though perhaps their confidence was based more on zeal than knowledge. 20:23 Jesus assured them that they would indeed drink of His cup. James would be martyred and John persecuted and exiled to the Isle of Patmos. Robert Little said, James died a martyr’s death; John lived a martyr’s life.Then Jesus explained that He could not arbitrarily grant places of honor in the kingdom; the Father had determined a special basis on which these positions would be assigned. They thought it was a matter of political patronage, that because they were so close to Christ, they had a special claim to places of preferment. But it was not a question of personal favoritism. In the counsels of God, the places on His right hand and left hand would be given on the basis of suffering for Him. This means that the chief honors in the kingdom are not limited to first century Christians; some living today might win themby suffering. 20:24 The other ten disciples were greatly displeased that the sons of Zebedee had made such a request. They were probably indignant because they themselves wanted to be greatest and resented any prior claims being made by James and John! 20:25-27 This gave our Lord the opportunity to make a revolutionary statement concerning greatness in His kingdom. The Gentiles think of greatness in terms of mastery and rule. In Christ’s kingdom, greatness is manifested by service. Whoever aspires to greatness must become a servant, and whoever desires to be first must become a slave. 20:28 The Son of Man is the perfect example of lowly service. He came into the world not to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many. The whole purpose of the Incarnation can be summed up in two wordsserve and give. It is amazing to think that the exalted Lord humbled Himself to the manger and to the cross. His greatness was manifested in the depth of His humiliation. And so it must be for us. He gave His life a ransom for many. His death satisfied all God’s righteous demands against sin. It was sufficient to put away all the sins of all the world. But it is effective only for those who accept Him as Lord and Savior. Have you ever done this?

Matthew 20:29

L. Healing of Two Blind Men (20:29-34) 20:29, 30 By now Jesus had crossed the Jordan from Perea and had reached Jericho. As He was leaving the city, two blind men cried out to Him, Have mercy on us, O Lord, Son of David! Their use of the title Son of David means that, though physically blind, their spiritual vision was so acute as to recognize Jesus as the Messiah. They may represent the believing remnant of blinded Israel who will acknowledge Him as the Christ when He returns to reign (Isa_35:5; Isa_42:7; Rom_11:25-26; 2Co_3:16; Rev_1:7). 20:31-34 The crowd tried to hush them, but they cried after Him more insistently. When Jesus asked what they wanted, they didn’t indulge in generalities, as we often do when we pray. They came right to the point: Lord, that our eyes may be opened. Their specific request received a specific response. Jesus had compassion and touched their eyes. And immediately they received their sight, and they followed Him. With regard to His touching them, Gaebelein makes a helpful observation: We have learned before the typical meaning of healing by touch in this Gospel. Whenever the Lord heals by touch it has reference, dispensationally, to His personal presence on the earth and His merciful dealing with Israel. When He heals by His Word, absent in person, … or if He is touched in faith, it refers to the time when He is absent from the earth, and Gentiles approaching Him in faith are healed by Him. There are difficulties in reconciling Matthew’s account of this incident with Mar_10:46-52 and Luk_18:35-43; Luk_19:1. Here are two blind men; in Mark and Luke, only one is mentioned. It has been suggested that Mark and Luke mention the well-known one, Bartimaeus, and Matthew, writing his Gospel especially for Jews, mentions two as the minimum number for a valid testimony (2Co_13:1). In Matthew and Mark, the incident is said to have occurred as Jesus left Jericho; in Luke, it is said to have happened as He drew near the city. In fact there were two Jerichos, an old Jericho and a new one, and the miracle of healing probably took place as Jesus was leaving one and entering the other.