Matthew 22

Matthew 22:1

The Authority of the Lord

This is where the chief priests and elders begin a dispute with the Lord. In the following section, we find more disputes. In these disputes the Pharisees, the Herodians, the Sadducees and a lawyer also come to speak with cunning questions, all of which through His answers have no rebuttal. The Lord concludes the disputes with a question to them concerning His own Person (Matthew 22:41-46).

Apparently, the different classes of people come to judge Him or embarrass Him. In reality, all appear before Him, one after the other, to hear God’s judgment of themselves. He reveals their true condition.

The temple is His dwelling place, His home. He teaches there. In this place, the religious leaders of the people come to Him with a question about His authority. It is not a fair question, but a question to dispute His authority. It is the question about the authority that they moderate themselves and deny Him. However audacious it is to ask Him about His authority since His authority is impossible to deny.

Those who must lead the people deny His authority. They set themselves as judges. The question “by what authority are You doing these things?” is enquiring about His authority. The question “who gave You this authority” is important to them, for they have not given this authority to Him. He is not qualified by them.

The Lord asks a question in return. His questions always aim to shed the true light on a matter. In this way, He wants to teach the enquirer about his own position and also about the position that He Himself occupies. If the person asking the question were to acknowledge this, it would mean new life for him.

He makes their assessment of the service of John and in particular his baptism the test question for their conscience. If they gave an honest answer, they would also have a proper assessment of His service. For John was His forerunner and announced His coming and pointed Him out. His opponents realize this and discuss what response each answer to the question concerned would provoke. Again, it becomes clear that they are not honest.

The Lord’s question does not appeal to miracles or prophecy, but to their conscience. In their discussion there is no place for God and therefore their answer is false and wrong. If God is not the Object, then the ‘self’ is the idol. They don’t want to say: “From heaven”, because then they really should have believed him. And they definitely do not want that. If their answer would be: “From men”, they would lose their credibility with the crowds. And the honor of the people is precisely what they are after.

Their answer “we do not know” is the result of self-confidence and fear of man. It shows that they are not competent to ask the question about His authority. There is no point in answering their question. With their answers they admit that they are blind leaders.

Matthew 22:2

The Authority of the Lord

This is where the chief priests and elders begin a dispute with the Lord. In the following section, we find more disputes. In these disputes the Pharisees, the Herodians, the Sadducees and a lawyer also come to speak with cunning questions, all of which through His answers have no rebuttal. The Lord concludes the disputes with a question to them concerning His own Person (Matthew 22:41-46).

Apparently, the different classes of people come to judge Him or embarrass Him. In reality, all appear before Him, one after the other, to hear God’s judgment of themselves. He reveals their true condition.

The temple is His dwelling place, His home. He teaches there. In this place, the religious leaders of the people come to Him with a question about His authority. It is not a fair question, but a question to dispute His authority. It is the question about the authority that they moderate themselves and deny Him. However audacious it is to ask Him about His authority since His authority is impossible to deny.

Those who must lead the people deny His authority. They set themselves as judges. The question “by what authority are You doing these things?” is enquiring about His authority. The question “who gave You this authority” is important to them, for they have not given this authority to Him. He is not qualified by them.

The Lord asks a question in return. His questions always aim to shed the true light on a matter. In this way, He wants to teach the enquirer about his own position and also about the position that He Himself occupies. If the person asking the question were to acknowledge this, it would mean new life for him.

He makes their assessment of the service of John and in particular his baptism the test question for their conscience. If they gave an honest answer, they would also have a proper assessment of His service. For John was His forerunner and announced His coming and pointed Him out. His opponents realize this and discuss what response each answer to the question concerned would provoke. Again, it becomes clear that they are not honest.

The Lord’s question does not appeal to miracles or prophecy, but to their conscience. In their discussion there is no place for God and therefore their answer is false and wrong. If God is not the Object, then the ‘self’ is the idol. They don’t want to say: “From heaven”, because then they really should have believed him. And they definitely do not want that. If their answer would be: “From men”, they would lose their credibility with the crowds. And the honor of the people is precisely what they are after.

Their answer “we do not know” is the result of self-confidence and fear of man. It shows that they are not competent to ask the question about His authority. There is no point in answering their question. With their answers they admit that they are blind leaders.

Matthew 22:3

The Authority of the Lord

This is where the chief priests and elders begin a dispute with the Lord. In the following section, we find more disputes. In these disputes the Pharisees, the Herodians, the Sadducees and a lawyer also come to speak with cunning questions, all of which through His answers have no rebuttal. The Lord concludes the disputes with a question to them concerning His own Person (Matthew 22:41-46).

Apparently, the different classes of people come to judge Him or embarrass Him. In reality, all appear before Him, one after the other, to hear God’s judgment of themselves. He reveals their true condition.

The temple is His dwelling place, His home. He teaches there. In this place, the religious leaders of the people come to Him with a question about His authority. It is not a fair question, but a question to dispute His authority. It is the question about the authority that they moderate themselves and deny Him. However audacious it is to ask Him about His authority since His authority is impossible to deny.

Those who must lead the people deny His authority. They set themselves as judges. The question “by what authority are You doing these things?” is enquiring about His authority. The question “who gave You this authority” is important to them, for they have not given this authority to Him. He is not qualified by them.

The Lord asks a question in return. His questions always aim to shed the true light on a matter. In this way, He wants to teach the enquirer about his own position and also about the position that He Himself occupies. If the person asking the question were to acknowledge this, it would mean new life for him.

He makes their assessment of the service of John and in particular his baptism the test question for their conscience. If they gave an honest answer, they would also have a proper assessment of His service. For John was His forerunner and announced His coming and pointed Him out. His opponents realize this and discuss what response each answer to the question concerned would provoke. Again, it becomes clear that they are not honest.

The Lord’s question does not appeal to miracles or prophecy, but to their conscience. In their discussion there is no place for God and therefore their answer is false and wrong. If God is not the Object, then the ‘self’ is the idol. They don’t want to say: “From heaven”, because then they really should have believed him. And they definitely do not want that. If their answer would be: “From men”, they would lose their credibility with the crowds. And the honor of the people is precisely what they are after.

Their answer “we do not know” is the result of self-confidence and fear of man. It shows that they are not competent to ask the question about His authority. There is no point in answering their question. With their answers they admit that they are blind leaders.

Matthew 22:4

The Authority of the Lord

This is where the chief priests and elders begin a dispute with the Lord. In the following section, we find more disputes. In these disputes the Pharisees, the Herodians, the Sadducees and a lawyer also come to speak with cunning questions, all of which through His answers have no rebuttal. The Lord concludes the disputes with a question to them concerning His own Person (Matthew 22:41-46).

Apparently, the different classes of people come to judge Him or embarrass Him. In reality, all appear before Him, one after the other, to hear God’s judgment of themselves. He reveals their true condition.

The temple is His dwelling place, His home. He teaches there. In this place, the religious leaders of the people come to Him with a question about His authority. It is not a fair question, but a question to dispute His authority. It is the question about the authority that they moderate themselves and deny Him. However audacious it is to ask Him about His authority since His authority is impossible to deny.

Those who must lead the people deny His authority. They set themselves as judges. The question “by what authority are You doing these things?” is enquiring about His authority. The question “who gave You this authority” is important to them, for they have not given this authority to Him. He is not qualified by them.

The Lord asks a question in return. His questions always aim to shed the true light on a matter. In this way, He wants to teach the enquirer about his own position and also about the position that He Himself occupies. If the person asking the question were to acknowledge this, it would mean new life for him.

He makes their assessment of the service of John and in particular his baptism the test question for their conscience. If they gave an honest answer, they would also have a proper assessment of His service. For John was His forerunner and announced His coming and pointed Him out. His opponents realize this and discuss what response each answer to the question concerned would provoke. Again, it becomes clear that they are not honest.

The Lord’s question does not appeal to miracles or prophecy, but to their conscience. In their discussion there is no place for God and therefore their answer is false and wrong. If God is not the Object, then the ‘self’ is the idol. They don’t want to say: “From heaven”, because then they really should have believed him. And they definitely do not want that. If their answer would be: “From men”, they would lose their credibility with the crowds. And the honor of the people is precisely what they are after.

Their answer “we do not know” is the result of self-confidence and fear of man. It shows that they are not competent to ask the question about His authority. There is no point in answering their question. With their answers they admit that they are blind leaders.

Matthew 22:5

The Authority of the Lord

This is where the chief priests and elders begin a dispute with the Lord. In the following section, we find more disputes. In these disputes the Pharisees, the Herodians, the Sadducees and a lawyer also come to speak with cunning questions, all of which through His answers have no rebuttal. The Lord concludes the disputes with a question to them concerning His own Person (Matthew 22:41-46).

Apparently, the different classes of people come to judge Him or embarrass Him. In reality, all appear before Him, one after the other, to hear God’s judgment of themselves. He reveals their true condition.

The temple is His dwelling place, His home. He teaches there. In this place, the religious leaders of the people come to Him with a question about His authority. It is not a fair question, but a question to dispute His authority. It is the question about the authority that they moderate themselves and deny Him. However audacious it is to ask Him about His authority since His authority is impossible to deny.

Those who must lead the people deny His authority. They set themselves as judges. The question “by what authority are You doing these things?” is enquiring about His authority. The question “who gave You this authority” is important to them, for they have not given this authority to Him. He is not qualified by them.

The Lord asks a question in return. His questions always aim to shed the true light on a matter. In this way, He wants to teach the enquirer about his own position and also about the position that He Himself occupies. If the person asking the question were to acknowledge this, it would mean new life for him.

He makes their assessment of the service of John and in particular his baptism the test question for their conscience. If they gave an honest answer, they would also have a proper assessment of His service. For John was His forerunner and announced His coming and pointed Him out. His opponents realize this and discuss what response each answer to the question concerned would provoke. Again, it becomes clear that they are not honest.

The Lord’s question does not appeal to miracles or prophecy, but to their conscience. In their discussion there is no place for God and therefore their answer is false and wrong. If God is not the Object, then the ‘self’ is the idol. They don’t want to say: “From heaven”, because then they really should have believed him. And they definitely do not want that. If their answer would be: “From men”, they would lose their credibility with the crowds. And the honor of the people is precisely what they are after.

Their answer “we do not know” is the result of self-confidence and fear of man. It shows that they are not competent to ask the question about His authority. There is no point in answering their question. With their answers they admit that they are blind leaders.

Matthew 22:6

Parable of Two Sons

The Lord takes the initiative by asking them a question in the form of a parable. The vineyard is a picture of Israel under the law (Isaiah 5:7). With this parable the Lord shows that the spiritual leaders of the people are further away from God than those of the people they most despise.

The parable is about a man with two children. They are each instructed to work in the vineyard, but not at the same time. First the one child gets that assignment. After an initial refusal he then goes because he repents of his refusal. Then the second child gets that assignment. He seems willing because he agrees that he will go. However, he does so with the words “I [will], sir!” This means that he sees his father as a ‘sir’ and has no relationship of love with him. His willingness is therefore only in appearances, because in the end he does not go.

Then the Lord Jesus asks who did his father’s will. To this the leaders give the right answer: “The first.” He makes it clear to them that this ‘first’ child represents people who first did not do God’s will. They lived in sin. It is these people who are repentant about their sins and are allowed to enter the kingdom of God before they do. In doing so, He equates the leaders with the second child who said to go into the vineyard, but did not do so.

Now the Lord refers back to His question about John and shows how important it is to believe in His message. John came to them “in the way of righteousness”, that is, he preached in accordance with the right of God, but they rejected him. With this, Christ has fully demonstrated their corrupt attitude toward Him and thus also the impossibility of judging His authority.

Matthew 22:7

Parable of Two Sons

The Lord takes the initiative by asking them a question in the form of a parable. The vineyard is a picture of Israel under the law (Isaiah 5:7). With this parable the Lord shows that the spiritual leaders of the people are further away from God than those of the people they most despise.

The parable is about a man with two children. They are each instructed to work in the vineyard, but not at the same time. First the one child gets that assignment. After an initial refusal he then goes because he repents of his refusal. Then the second child gets that assignment. He seems willing because he agrees that he will go. However, he does so with the words “I [will], sir!” This means that he sees his father as a ‘sir’ and has no relationship of love with him. His willingness is therefore only in appearances, because in the end he does not go.

Then the Lord Jesus asks who did his father’s will. To this the leaders give the right answer: “The first.” He makes it clear to them that this ‘first’ child represents people who first did not do God’s will. They lived in sin. It is these people who are repentant about their sins and are allowed to enter the kingdom of God before they do. In doing so, He equates the leaders with the second child who said to go into the vineyard, but did not do so.

Now the Lord refers back to His question about John and shows how important it is to believe in His message. John came to them “in the way of righteousness”, that is, he preached in accordance with the right of God, but they rejected him. With this, Christ has fully demonstrated their corrupt attitude toward Him and thus also the impossibility of judging His authority.

Matthew 22:8

Parable of Two Sons

The Lord takes the initiative by asking them a question in the form of a parable. The vineyard is a picture of Israel under the law (Isaiah 5:7). With this parable the Lord shows that the spiritual leaders of the people are further away from God than those of the people they most despise.

The parable is about a man with two children. They are each instructed to work in the vineyard, but not at the same time. First the one child gets that assignment. After an initial refusal he then goes because he repents of his refusal. Then the second child gets that assignment. He seems willing because he agrees that he will go. However, he does so with the words “I [will], sir!” This means that he sees his father as a ‘sir’ and has no relationship of love with him. His willingness is therefore only in appearances, because in the end he does not go.

Then the Lord Jesus asks who did his father’s will. To this the leaders give the right answer: “The first.” He makes it clear to them that this ‘first’ child represents people who first did not do God’s will. They lived in sin. It is these people who are repentant about their sins and are allowed to enter the kingdom of God before they do. In doing so, He equates the leaders with the second child who said to go into the vineyard, but did not do so.

Now the Lord refers back to His question about John and shows how important it is to believe in His message. John came to them “in the way of righteousness”, that is, he preached in accordance with the right of God, but they rejected him. With this, Christ has fully demonstrated their corrupt attitude toward Him and thus also the impossibility of judging His authority.

Matthew 22:9

Parable of Two Sons

The Lord takes the initiative by asking them a question in the form of a parable. The vineyard is a picture of Israel under the law (Isaiah 5:7). With this parable the Lord shows that the spiritual leaders of the people are further away from God than those of the people they most despise.

The parable is about a man with two children. They are each instructed to work in the vineyard, but not at the same time. First the one child gets that assignment. After an initial refusal he then goes because he repents of his refusal. Then the second child gets that assignment. He seems willing because he agrees that he will go. However, he does so with the words “I [will], sir!” This means that he sees his father as a ‘sir’ and has no relationship of love with him. His willingness is therefore only in appearances, because in the end he does not go.

Then the Lord Jesus asks who did his father’s will. To this the leaders give the right answer: “The first.” He makes it clear to them that this ‘first’ child represents people who first did not do God’s will. They lived in sin. It is these people who are repentant about their sins and are allowed to enter the kingdom of God before they do. In doing so, He equates the leaders with the second child who said to go into the vineyard, but did not do so.

Now the Lord refers back to His question about John and shows how important it is to believe in His message. John came to them “in the way of righteousness”, that is, he preached in accordance with the right of God, but they rejected him. With this, Christ has fully demonstrated their corrupt attitude toward Him and thus also the impossibility of judging His authority.

Matthew 22:10

Parable of Two Sons

The Lord takes the initiative by asking them a question in the form of a parable. The vineyard is a picture of Israel under the law (Isaiah 5:7). With this parable the Lord shows that the spiritual leaders of the people are further away from God than those of the people they most despise.

The parable is about a man with two children. They are each instructed to work in the vineyard, but not at the same time. First the one child gets that assignment. After an initial refusal he then goes because he repents of his refusal. Then the second child gets that assignment. He seems willing because he agrees that he will go. However, he does so with the words “I [will], sir!” This means that he sees his father as a ‘sir’ and has no relationship of love with him. His willingness is therefore only in appearances, because in the end he does not go.

Then the Lord Jesus asks who did his father’s will. To this the leaders give the right answer: “The first.” He makes it clear to them that this ‘first’ child represents people who first did not do God’s will. They lived in sin. It is these people who are repentant about their sins and are allowed to enter the kingdom of God before they do. In doing so, He equates the leaders with the second child who said to go into the vineyard, but did not do so.

Now the Lord refers back to His question about John and shows how important it is to believe in His message. John came to them “in the way of righteousness”, that is, he preached in accordance with the right of God, but they rejected him. With this, Christ has fully demonstrated their corrupt attitude toward Him and thus also the impossibility of judging His authority.

Matthew 22:11

Parable of the Vine-Growers

The Lord continues His teaching. He adds another parable to it to make their position clear. With the words “listen to another parable” He commands that they should continue listening. This parable is not only about their behavior toward God as in the previous one, but also about God’s behavior toward them. Three charges against Israel come to light in this parable: 1. no fruit for God; 2. the abuse and killing of God’s slaves, the prophets; 3. the rejection and murder of the Son.

The presentation of all that the landowner does to his vineyard is based on the parable in which Israel is compared to a vineyard to which God has tried everything to make it produce fruit (Isaiah 5:1-2). In this we see the special favor of God for Israel. As those knowledgeable in the law, they must have recognized this.

When all the work with an eye to obtaining fruit has been done, the landowner rents out his vineyard to vine-growers. He himself goes abroad, but remains closely involved with his vineyard while abroad. He knows exactly when it is harvest time. At that time he sends his slaves to receive “his” fruits. The produce is his, it belongs to him.

But the vine-growers have no intention of giving the landowner his fruit. They see the landowner’s slaves as intruders on their property and act accordingly. One slave they beat, the other they kill and yet another is stoned by them. Because the landowner wants to receive fruit, he sends even more slaves. But when they come to the vine-growers, they suffer the same fate.

While the landowner knows what they have done with his slaves, he is making one last attempt to receive the fruits. He sees one more possibility to move the vine-growers to give him his fruits. He will send his son. They will certainly have respect for his son and spare him.

But what turns out to be the case? When the son appears, destruction and selfishness are expressed in the most terrible way imaginable. The vine-growers know that he is the heir. Because they want his inheritance themselves, they deny him his right to it. To make this evil scheme succeed, they decide that they will kill the heir. They turn words into action. They knowingly kill the heir, the son of the landowner and owner of the vineyard.

This is the end of the experiment with man. The question of his true condition has been answered. God’s attempts to get fruit out of His vineyard are over. The natural man has shown his complete hatred of God and what comes from Him. Further testing is useless. The situation is hopeless. What remains is judgment.

The presence of a Divine Person in love and goodness, a Man among men, ultimately only gives them the opportunity to insult God in the most wicked way. Now it appears fully that man is lost. The proof of man’s wickedness is undeniable.

Matthew 22:12

Parable of the Vine-Growers

The Lord continues His teaching. He adds another parable to it to make their position clear. With the words “listen to another parable” He commands that they should continue listening. This parable is not only about their behavior toward God as in the previous one, but also about God’s behavior toward them. Three charges against Israel come to light in this parable: 1. no fruit for God; 2. the abuse and killing of God’s slaves, the prophets; 3. the rejection and murder of the Son.

The presentation of all that the landowner does to his vineyard is based on the parable in which Israel is compared to a vineyard to which God has tried everything to make it produce fruit (Isaiah 5:1-2). In this we see the special favor of God for Israel. As those knowledgeable in the law, they must have recognized this.

When all the work with an eye to obtaining fruit has been done, the landowner rents out his vineyard to vine-growers. He himself goes abroad, but remains closely involved with his vineyard while abroad. He knows exactly when it is harvest time. At that time he sends his slaves to receive “his” fruits. The produce is his, it belongs to him.

But the vine-growers have no intention of giving the landowner his fruit. They see the landowner’s slaves as intruders on their property and act accordingly. One slave they beat, the other they kill and yet another is stoned by them. Because the landowner wants to receive fruit, he sends even more slaves. But when they come to the vine-growers, they suffer the same fate.

While the landowner knows what they have done with his slaves, he is making one last attempt to receive the fruits. He sees one more possibility to move the vine-growers to give him his fruits. He will send his son. They will certainly have respect for his son and spare him.

But what turns out to be the case? When the son appears, destruction and selfishness are expressed in the most terrible way imaginable. The vine-growers know that he is the heir. Because they want his inheritance themselves, they deny him his right to it. To make this evil scheme succeed, they decide that they will kill the heir. They turn words into action. They knowingly kill the heir, the son of the landowner and owner of the vineyard.

This is the end of the experiment with man. The question of his true condition has been answered. God’s attempts to get fruit out of His vineyard are over. The natural man has shown his complete hatred of God and what comes from Him. Further testing is useless. The situation is hopeless. What remains is judgment.

The presence of a Divine Person in love and goodness, a Man among men, ultimately only gives them the opportunity to insult God in the most wicked way. Now it appears fully that man is lost. The proof of man’s wickedness is undeniable.

Matthew 22:13

Parable of the Vine-Growers

The Lord continues His teaching. He adds another parable to it to make their position clear. With the words “listen to another parable” He commands that they should continue listening. This parable is not only about their behavior toward God as in the previous one, but also about God’s behavior toward them. Three charges against Israel come to light in this parable: 1. no fruit for God; 2. the abuse and killing of God’s slaves, the prophets; 3. the rejection and murder of the Son.

The presentation of all that the landowner does to his vineyard is based on the parable in which Israel is compared to a vineyard to which God has tried everything to make it produce fruit (Isaiah 5:1-2). In this we see the special favor of God for Israel. As those knowledgeable in the law, they must have recognized this.

When all the work with an eye to obtaining fruit has been done, the landowner rents out his vineyard to vine-growers. He himself goes abroad, but remains closely involved with his vineyard while abroad. He knows exactly when it is harvest time. At that time he sends his slaves to receive “his” fruits. The produce is his, it belongs to him.

But the vine-growers have no intention of giving the landowner his fruit. They see the landowner’s slaves as intruders on their property and act accordingly. One slave they beat, the other they kill and yet another is stoned by them. Because the landowner wants to receive fruit, he sends even more slaves. But when they come to the vine-growers, they suffer the same fate.

While the landowner knows what they have done with his slaves, he is making one last attempt to receive the fruits. He sees one more possibility to move the vine-growers to give him his fruits. He will send his son. They will certainly have respect for his son and spare him.

But what turns out to be the case? When the son appears, destruction and selfishness are expressed in the most terrible way imaginable. The vine-growers know that he is the heir. Because they want his inheritance themselves, they deny him his right to it. To make this evil scheme succeed, they decide that they will kill the heir. They turn words into action. They knowingly kill the heir, the son of the landowner and owner of the vineyard.

This is the end of the experiment with man. The question of his true condition has been answered. God’s attempts to get fruit out of His vineyard are over. The natural man has shown his complete hatred of God and what comes from Him. Further testing is useless. The situation is hopeless. What remains is judgment.

The presence of a Divine Person in love and goodness, a Man among men, ultimately only gives them the opportunity to insult God in the most wicked way. Now it appears fully that man is lost. The proof of man’s wickedness is undeniable.

Matthew 22:14

Parable of the Vine-Growers

The Lord continues His teaching. He adds another parable to it to make their position clear. With the words “listen to another parable” He commands that they should continue listening. This parable is not only about their behavior toward God as in the previous one, but also about God’s behavior toward them. Three charges against Israel come to light in this parable: 1. no fruit for God; 2. the abuse and killing of God’s slaves, the prophets; 3. the rejection and murder of the Son.

The presentation of all that the landowner does to his vineyard is based on the parable in which Israel is compared to a vineyard to which God has tried everything to make it produce fruit (Isaiah 5:1-2). In this we see the special favor of God for Israel. As those knowledgeable in the law, they must have recognized this.

When all the work with an eye to obtaining fruit has been done, the landowner rents out his vineyard to vine-growers. He himself goes abroad, but remains closely involved with his vineyard while abroad. He knows exactly when it is harvest time. At that time he sends his slaves to receive “his” fruits. The produce is his, it belongs to him.

But the vine-growers have no intention of giving the landowner his fruit. They see the landowner’s slaves as intruders on their property and act accordingly. One slave they beat, the other they kill and yet another is stoned by them. Because the landowner wants to receive fruit, he sends even more slaves. But when they come to the vine-growers, they suffer the same fate.

While the landowner knows what they have done with his slaves, he is making one last attempt to receive the fruits. He sees one more possibility to move the vine-growers to give him his fruits. He will send his son. They will certainly have respect for his son and spare him.

But what turns out to be the case? When the son appears, destruction and selfishness are expressed in the most terrible way imaginable. The vine-growers know that he is the heir. Because they want his inheritance themselves, they deny him his right to it. To make this evil scheme succeed, they decide that they will kill the heir. They turn words into action. They knowingly kill the heir, the son of the landowner and owner of the vineyard.

This is the end of the experiment with man. The question of his true condition has been answered. God’s attempts to get fruit out of His vineyard are over. The natural man has shown his complete hatred of God and what comes from Him. Further testing is useless. The situation is hopeless. What remains is judgment.

The presence of a Divine Person in love and goodness, a Man among men, ultimately only gives them the opportunity to insult God in the most wicked way. Now it appears fully that man is lost. The proof of man’s wickedness is undeniable.

Matthew 22:15

Parable of the Vine-Growers

The Lord continues His teaching. He adds another parable to it to make their position clear. With the words “listen to another parable” He commands that they should continue listening. This parable is not only about their behavior toward God as in the previous one, but also about God’s behavior toward them. Three charges against Israel come to light in this parable: 1. no fruit for God; 2. the abuse and killing of God’s slaves, the prophets; 3. the rejection and murder of the Son.

The presentation of all that the landowner does to his vineyard is based on the parable in which Israel is compared to a vineyard to which God has tried everything to make it produce fruit (Isaiah 5:1-2). In this we see the special favor of God for Israel. As those knowledgeable in the law, they must have recognized this.

When all the work with an eye to obtaining fruit has been done, the landowner rents out his vineyard to vine-growers. He himself goes abroad, but remains closely involved with his vineyard while abroad. He knows exactly when it is harvest time. At that time he sends his slaves to receive “his” fruits. The produce is his, it belongs to him.

But the vine-growers have no intention of giving the landowner his fruit. They see the landowner’s slaves as intruders on their property and act accordingly. One slave they beat, the other they kill and yet another is stoned by them. Because the landowner wants to receive fruit, he sends even more slaves. But when they come to the vine-growers, they suffer the same fate.

While the landowner knows what they have done with his slaves, he is making one last attempt to receive the fruits. He sees one more possibility to move the vine-growers to give him his fruits. He will send his son. They will certainly have respect for his son and spare him.

But what turns out to be the case? When the son appears, destruction and selfishness are expressed in the most terrible way imaginable. The vine-growers know that he is the heir. Because they want his inheritance themselves, they deny him his right to it. To make this evil scheme succeed, they decide that they will kill the heir. They turn words into action. They knowingly kill the heir, the son of the landowner and owner of the vineyard.

This is the end of the experiment with man. The question of his true condition has been answered. God’s attempts to get fruit out of His vineyard are over. The natural man has shown his complete hatred of God and what comes from Him. Further testing is useless. The situation is hopeless. What remains is judgment.

The presence of a Divine Person in love and goodness, a Man among men, ultimately only gives them the opportunity to insult God in the most wicked way. Now it appears fully that man is lost. The proof of man’s wickedness is undeniable.

Matthew 22:16

Parable of the Vine-Growers

The Lord continues His teaching. He adds another parable to it to make their position clear. With the words “listen to another parable” He commands that they should continue listening. This parable is not only about their behavior toward God as in the previous one, but also about God’s behavior toward them. Three charges against Israel come to light in this parable: 1. no fruit for God; 2. the abuse and killing of God’s slaves, the prophets; 3. the rejection and murder of the Son.

The presentation of all that the landowner does to his vineyard is based on the parable in which Israel is compared to a vineyard to which God has tried everything to make it produce fruit (Isaiah 5:1-2). In this we see the special favor of God for Israel. As those knowledgeable in the law, they must have recognized this.

When all the work with an eye to obtaining fruit has been done, the landowner rents out his vineyard to vine-growers. He himself goes abroad, but remains closely involved with his vineyard while abroad. He knows exactly when it is harvest time. At that time he sends his slaves to receive “his” fruits. The produce is his, it belongs to him.

But the vine-growers have no intention of giving the landowner his fruit. They see the landowner’s slaves as intruders on their property and act accordingly. One slave they beat, the other they kill and yet another is stoned by them. Because the landowner wants to receive fruit, he sends even more slaves. But when they come to the vine-growers, they suffer the same fate.

While the landowner knows what they have done with his slaves, he is making one last attempt to receive the fruits. He sees one more possibility to move the vine-growers to give him his fruits. He will send his son. They will certainly have respect for his son and spare him.

But what turns out to be the case? When the son appears, destruction and selfishness are expressed in the most terrible way imaginable. The vine-growers know that he is the heir. Because they want his inheritance themselves, they deny him his right to it. To make this evil scheme succeed, they decide that they will kill the heir. They turn words into action. They knowingly kill the heir, the son of the landowner and owner of the vineyard.

This is the end of the experiment with man. The question of his true condition has been answered. God’s attempts to get fruit out of His vineyard are over. The natural man has shown his complete hatred of God and what comes from Him. Further testing is useless. The situation is hopeless. What remains is judgment.

The presence of a Divine Person in love and goodness, a Man among men, ultimately only gives them the opportunity to insult God in the most wicked way. Now it appears fully that man is lost. The proof of man’s wickedness is undeniable.

Matthew 22:17

Parable of the Vine-Growers

The Lord continues His teaching. He adds another parable to it to make their position clear. With the words “listen to another parable” He commands that they should continue listening. This parable is not only about their behavior toward God as in the previous one, but also about God’s behavior toward them. Three charges against Israel come to light in this parable: 1. no fruit for God; 2. the abuse and killing of God’s slaves, the prophets; 3. the rejection and murder of the Son.

The presentation of all that the landowner does to his vineyard is based on the parable in which Israel is compared to a vineyard to which God has tried everything to make it produce fruit (Isaiah 5:1-2). In this we see the special favor of God for Israel. As those knowledgeable in the law, they must have recognized this.

When all the work with an eye to obtaining fruit has been done, the landowner rents out his vineyard to vine-growers. He himself goes abroad, but remains closely involved with his vineyard while abroad. He knows exactly when it is harvest time. At that time he sends his slaves to receive “his” fruits. The produce is his, it belongs to him.

But the vine-growers have no intention of giving the landowner his fruit. They see the landowner’s slaves as intruders on their property and act accordingly. One slave they beat, the other they kill and yet another is stoned by them. Because the landowner wants to receive fruit, he sends even more slaves. But when they come to the vine-growers, they suffer the same fate.

While the landowner knows what they have done with his slaves, he is making one last attempt to receive the fruits. He sees one more possibility to move the vine-growers to give him his fruits. He will send his son. They will certainly have respect for his son and spare him.

But what turns out to be the case? When the son appears, destruction and selfishness are expressed in the most terrible way imaginable. The vine-growers know that he is the heir. Because they want his inheritance themselves, they deny him his right to it. To make this evil scheme succeed, they decide that they will kill the heir. They turn words into action. They knowingly kill the heir, the son of the landowner and owner of the vineyard.

This is the end of the experiment with man. The question of his true condition has been answered. God’s attempts to get fruit out of His vineyard are over. The natural man has shown his complete hatred of God and what comes from Him. Further testing is useless. The situation is hopeless. What remains is judgment.

The presence of a Divine Person in love and goodness, a Man among men, ultimately only gives them the opportunity to insult God in the most wicked way. Now it appears fully that man is lost. The proof of man’s wickedness is undeniable.

Matthew 22:18

Consequences of the Rejection

Finally, the owner of the vineyard comes himself. Then the question is not what the vine-growers will do with the landowner, but what the landowner will do with the vine-growers. The Lord Jesus asks the leaders this question. They know how to give the right answer. This answer makes it clear that they can give a morally correct answer, while at the same time being blind to the fact that with this answer they have passed judgment on themselves. They go even further by saying that the vineyard will be given to others who will deliver the fruits in their time. That also happened, namely when the salvation went to the nations.

The Lord refers to the Scriptures they know so well. The conduct of the vine-growers is clearly revealed in their own Scriptures. He applies Psalms 118 to the parable he has just pronounced (Psalms 118:22-23). The son is the stone, the vine-growers are the builders. Just as the vine-growers rejected the son, so the builders rejected the stone. But God made it so that the rejected stone becomes the most important stone of the building. This is something no one could think of; only He could think of it.

It is therefore marvelous in the eyes of the faithful remnant in the end times, about which this psalm speaks. It is an astonishment that they will pronounce as a confession in the end times when they see Him they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10).

The Lord continues with the effect of the parable, and follows the judgment they themselves have made in their answer to His question (Matthew 21:41). “The kingdom of God” is taken from them, for that is present in His Person (Luke 17:21). He does not say that the kingdom of heaven will be taken from them, for they did not have it. The Lord Himself will depart from them.

He is the touchstone for every human being. All who fall on Him shall be broken to pieces. The leaders are such people. They have fallen on this stone, they have fallen over it, they have stumbled over it because they despised it. Therefore in the last days the stone will fall upon the rebellious people and scatter them like dust. This will happen when Christ returns to earth (cf. Daniel 2:34-35).

It is clear to the leaders that the Lord Jesus refers to them in His parables. That’s why they try to seize Him, but at the same time they think of the favor of the people they don’t want to lose. As in Matthew 21:26, here too they are guided by their fear of people, their fear of losing the prestige they believe they have. Fear of the multitude restrain their deeds, as in Matthew 21:26 where this fear restrained their tongue.

Matthew 22:19

Consequences of the Rejection

Finally, the owner of the vineyard comes himself. Then the question is not what the vine-growers will do with the landowner, but what the landowner will do with the vine-growers. The Lord Jesus asks the leaders this question. They know how to give the right answer. This answer makes it clear that they can give a morally correct answer, while at the same time being blind to the fact that with this answer they have passed judgment on themselves. They go even further by saying that the vineyard will be given to others who will deliver the fruits in their time. That also happened, namely when the salvation went to the nations.

The Lord refers to the Scriptures they know so well. The conduct of the vine-growers is clearly revealed in their own Scriptures. He applies Psalms 118 to the parable he has just pronounced (Psalms 118:22-23). The son is the stone, the vine-growers are the builders. Just as the vine-growers rejected the son, so the builders rejected the stone. But God made it so that the rejected stone becomes the most important stone of the building. This is something no one could think of; only He could think of it.

It is therefore marvelous in the eyes of the faithful remnant in the end times, about which this psalm speaks. It is an astonishment that they will pronounce as a confession in the end times when they see Him they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10).

The Lord continues with the effect of the parable, and follows the judgment they themselves have made in their answer to His question (Matthew 21:41). “The kingdom of God” is taken from them, for that is present in His Person (Luke 17:21). He does not say that the kingdom of heaven will be taken from them, for they did not have it. The Lord Himself will depart from them.

He is the touchstone for every human being. All who fall on Him shall be broken to pieces. The leaders are such people. They have fallen on this stone, they have fallen over it, they have stumbled over it because they despised it. Therefore in the last days the stone will fall upon the rebellious people and scatter them like dust. This will happen when Christ returns to earth (cf. Daniel 2:34-35).

It is clear to the leaders that the Lord Jesus refers to them in His parables. That’s why they try to seize Him, but at the same time they think of the favor of the people they don’t want to lose. As in Matthew 21:26, here too they are guided by their fear of people, their fear of losing the prestige they believe they have. Fear of the multitude restrain their deeds, as in Matthew 21:26 where this fear restrained their tongue.

Matthew 22:20

Consequences of the Rejection

Finally, the owner of the vineyard comes himself. Then the question is not what the vine-growers will do with the landowner, but what the landowner will do with the vine-growers. The Lord Jesus asks the leaders this question. They know how to give the right answer. This answer makes it clear that they can give a morally correct answer, while at the same time being blind to the fact that with this answer they have passed judgment on themselves. They go even further by saying that the vineyard will be given to others who will deliver the fruits in their time. That also happened, namely when the salvation went to the nations.

The Lord refers to the Scriptures they know so well. The conduct of the vine-growers is clearly revealed in their own Scriptures. He applies Psalms 118 to the parable he has just pronounced (Psalms 118:22-23). The son is the stone, the vine-growers are the builders. Just as the vine-growers rejected the son, so the builders rejected the stone. But God made it so that the rejected stone becomes the most important stone of the building. This is something no one could think of; only He could think of it.

It is therefore marvelous in the eyes of the faithful remnant in the end times, about which this psalm speaks. It is an astonishment that they will pronounce as a confession in the end times when they see Him they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10).

The Lord continues with the effect of the parable, and follows the judgment they themselves have made in their answer to His question (Matthew 21:41). “The kingdom of God” is taken from them, for that is present in His Person (Luke 17:21). He does not say that the kingdom of heaven will be taken from them, for they did not have it. The Lord Himself will depart from them.

He is the touchstone for every human being. All who fall on Him shall be broken to pieces. The leaders are such people. They have fallen on this stone, they have fallen over it, they have stumbled over it because they despised it. Therefore in the last days the stone will fall upon the rebellious people and scatter them like dust. This will happen when Christ returns to earth (cf. Daniel 2:34-35).

It is clear to the leaders that the Lord Jesus refers to them in His parables. That’s why they try to seize Him, but at the same time they think of the favor of the people they don’t want to lose. As in Matthew 21:26, here too they are guided by their fear of people, their fear of losing the prestige they believe they have. Fear of the multitude restrain their deeds, as in Matthew 21:26 where this fear restrained their tongue.

Matthew 22:21

Consequences of the Rejection

Finally, the owner of the vineyard comes himself. Then the question is not what the vine-growers will do with the landowner, but what the landowner will do with the vine-growers. The Lord Jesus asks the leaders this question. They know how to give the right answer. This answer makes it clear that they can give a morally correct answer, while at the same time being blind to the fact that with this answer they have passed judgment on themselves. They go even further by saying that the vineyard will be given to others who will deliver the fruits in their time. That also happened, namely when the salvation went to the nations.

The Lord refers to the Scriptures they know so well. The conduct of the vine-growers is clearly revealed in their own Scriptures. He applies Psalms 118 to the parable he has just pronounced (Psalms 118:22-23). The son is the stone, the vine-growers are the builders. Just as the vine-growers rejected the son, so the builders rejected the stone. But God made it so that the rejected stone becomes the most important stone of the building. This is something no one could think of; only He could think of it.

It is therefore marvelous in the eyes of the faithful remnant in the end times, about which this psalm speaks. It is an astonishment that they will pronounce as a confession in the end times when they see Him they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10).

The Lord continues with the effect of the parable, and follows the judgment they themselves have made in their answer to His question (Matthew 21:41). “The kingdom of God” is taken from them, for that is present in His Person (Luke 17:21). He does not say that the kingdom of heaven will be taken from them, for they did not have it. The Lord Himself will depart from them.

He is the touchstone for every human being. All who fall on Him shall be broken to pieces. The leaders are such people. They have fallen on this stone, they have fallen over it, they have stumbled over it because they despised it. Therefore in the last days the stone will fall upon the rebellious people and scatter them like dust. This will happen when Christ returns to earth (cf. Daniel 2:34-35).

It is clear to the leaders that the Lord Jesus refers to them in His parables. That’s why they try to seize Him, but at the same time they think of the favor of the people they don’t want to lose. As in Matthew 21:26, here too they are guided by their fear of people, their fear of losing the prestige they believe they have. Fear of the multitude restrain their deeds, as in Matthew 21:26 where this fear restrained their tongue.

Matthew 22:22

Consequences of the Rejection

Finally, the owner of the vineyard comes himself. Then the question is not what the vine-growers will do with the landowner, but what the landowner will do with the vine-growers. The Lord Jesus asks the leaders this question. They know how to give the right answer. This answer makes it clear that they can give a morally correct answer, while at the same time being blind to the fact that with this answer they have passed judgment on themselves. They go even further by saying that the vineyard will be given to others who will deliver the fruits in their time. That also happened, namely when the salvation went to the nations.

The Lord refers to the Scriptures they know so well. The conduct of the vine-growers is clearly revealed in their own Scriptures. He applies Psalms 118 to the parable he has just pronounced (Psalms 118:22-23). The son is the stone, the vine-growers are the builders. Just as the vine-growers rejected the son, so the builders rejected the stone. But God made it so that the rejected stone becomes the most important stone of the building. This is something no one could think of; only He could think of it.

It is therefore marvelous in the eyes of the faithful remnant in the end times, about which this psalm speaks. It is an astonishment that they will pronounce as a confession in the end times when they see Him they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10).

The Lord continues with the effect of the parable, and follows the judgment they themselves have made in their answer to His question (Matthew 21:41). “The kingdom of God” is taken from them, for that is present in His Person (Luke 17:21). He does not say that the kingdom of heaven will be taken from them, for they did not have it. The Lord Himself will depart from them.

He is the touchstone for every human being. All who fall on Him shall be broken to pieces. The leaders are such people. They have fallen on this stone, they have fallen over it, they have stumbled over it because they despised it. Therefore in the last days the stone will fall upon the rebellious people and scatter them like dust. This will happen when Christ returns to earth (cf. Daniel 2:34-35).

It is clear to the leaders that the Lord Jesus refers to them in His parables. That’s why they try to seize Him, but at the same time they think of the favor of the people they don’t want to lose. As in Matthew 21:26, here too they are guided by their fear of people, their fear of losing the prestige they believe they have. Fear of the multitude restrain their deeds, as in Matthew 21:26 where this fear restrained their tongue.

Matthew 22:23

Consequences of the Rejection

Finally, the owner of the vineyard comes himself. Then the question is not what the vine-growers will do with the landowner, but what the landowner will do with the vine-growers. The Lord Jesus asks the leaders this question. They know how to give the right answer. This answer makes it clear that they can give a morally correct answer, while at the same time being blind to the fact that with this answer they have passed judgment on themselves. They go even further by saying that the vineyard will be given to others who will deliver the fruits in their time. That also happened, namely when the salvation went to the nations.

The Lord refers to the Scriptures they know so well. The conduct of the vine-growers is clearly revealed in their own Scriptures. He applies Psalms 118 to the parable he has just pronounced (Psalms 118:22-23). The son is the stone, the vine-growers are the builders. Just as the vine-growers rejected the son, so the builders rejected the stone. But God made it so that the rejected stone becomes the most important stone of the building. This is something no one could think of; only He could think of it.

It is therefore marvelous in the eyes of the faithful remnant in the end times, about which this psalm speaks. It is an astonishment that they will pronounce as a confession in the end times when they see Him they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10).

The Lord continues with the effect of the parable, and follows the judgment they themselves have made in their answer to His question (Matthew 21:41). “The kingdom of God” is taken from them, for that is present in His Person (Luke 17:21). He does not say that the kingdom of heaven will be taken from them, for they did not have it. The Lord Himself will depart from them.

He is the touchstone for every human being. All who fall on Him shall be broken to pieces. The leaders are such people. They have fallen on this stone, they have fallen over it, they have stumbled over it because they despised it. Therefore in the last days the stone will fall upon the rebellious people and scatter them like dust. This will happen when Christ returns to earth (cf. Daniel 2:34-35).

It is clear to the leaders that the Lord Jesus refers to them in His parables. That’s why they try to seize Him, but at the same time they think of the favor of the people they don’t want to lose. As in Matthew 21:26, here too they are guided by their fear of people, their fear of losing the prestige they believe they have. Fear of the multitude restrain their deeds, as in Matthew 21:26 where this fear restrained their tongue.

Matthew 22:24

Consequences of the Rejection

Finally, the owner of the vineyard comes himself. Then the question is not what the vine-growers will do with the landowner, but what the landowner will do with the vine-growers. The Lord Jesus asks the leaders this question. They know how to give the right answer. This answer makes it clear that they can give a morally correct answer, while at the same time being blind to the fact that with this answer they have passed judgment on themselves. They go even further by saying that the vineyard will be given to others who will deliver the fruits in their time. That also happened, namely when the salvation went to the nations.

The Lord refers to the Scriptures they know so well. The conduct of the vine-growers is clearly revealed in their own Scriptures. He applies Psalms 118 to the parable he has just pronounced (Psalms 118:22-23). The son is the stone, the vine-growers are the builders. Just as the vine-growers rejected the son, so the builders rejected the stone. But God made it so that the rejected stone becomes the most important stone of the building. This is something no one could think of; only He could think of it.

It is therefore marvelous in the eyes of the faithful remnant in the end times, about which this psalm speaks. It is an astonishment that they will pronounce as a confession in the end times when they see Him they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10).

The Lord continues with the effect of the parable, and follows the judgment they themselves have made in their answer to His question (Matthew 21:41). “The kingdom of God” is taken from them, for that is present in His Person (Luke 17:21). He does not say that the kingdom of heaven will be taken from them, for they did not have it. The Lord Himself will depart from them.

He is the touchstone for every human being. All who fall on Him shall be broken to pieces. The leaders are such people. They have fallen on this stone, they have fallen over it, they have stumbled over it because they despised it. Therefore in the last days the stone will fall upon the rebellious people and scatter them like dust. This will happen when Christ returns to earth (cf. Daniel 2:34-35).

It is clear to the leaders that the Lord Jesus refers to them in His parables. That’s why they try to seize Him, but at the same time they think of the favor of the people they don’t want to lose. As in Matthew 21:26, here too they are guided by their fear of people, their fear of losing the prestige they believe they have. Fear of the multitude restrain their deeds, as in Matthew 21:26 where this fear restrained their tongue.

Matthew 22:26

Those Invited to a Wedding

With the following parable, the Lord reacted on His rejection, which He brought to light in the previous parable. In this reaction His grace is expressed. Despite His rejection, He still offers His grace in the invitation to come to the wedding. If they accept the invitation of the gospel, they come under the rule of heaven after the national collapse proposed in the preceding parable has taken place.

It is again a parable, but now in connection with the kingdom of heaven. That distinguishes this parable from the two previous. Those were about the righteous claims the Lord Jesus has on Israel on the basis of what He has confided to them and their response to it. This is about something new, the wedding. With this parable He brings again to light why He came. As in the previous parable, there is mention of a son, this time a son of a king.

The Lord introduces this parable with the words: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to.” This means that He does not announce the kingdom of heaven in its original form. This is no longer possible because of His rejection. By talking about a wedding, He emphasizes the joy that is connected to someone accepting the invitation and attending. In this parable an invitation is issued. The slaves are not ordered to go into the vineyard and work, but to call: “Come to the wedding feast.” There is not demanding, but giving.

The slaves are the disciples whom the Lord has sent out. The guests are first and foremost the Jews, the people of God. But the people don’t want to come, they reject the invitation. However, Christ is full of grace and sends out a second invitation to the same group of particularly privileged persons, the guests. He now instructs His slaves not only to invite, but also to present the attractiveness of the party in the invitation. It is all ready for the guests. They just need to come. He does everything He can to get the guests to the party.

The spiritual meaning is that everything is ready through the sacrifice of Christ. This was not yet the case for the first call. The fulfilment of the second invitation can be seen in the first chapters of Acts. This second invitation is made by the apostles when the work of redemption is completed.

But the guests show no interest. The cause is different. There is one group that is too busy with its own possessions, another group is busy with its business. There is also a group among the guests that react differently. When they receive the invitation, they flare up in anger. This has to do with their pride in their national religion from which they derive their importance. They answered the invitation by mistreating and killing the messengers.

It should come as no surprise that the king cannot let these reactions to his invitation go unpunished. In the year AD 70 God allowed Jerusalem to be destroyed by the Romans as “his armies”.

Matthew 22:27

Those Invited to a Wedding

With the following parable, the Lord reacted on His rejection, which He brought to light in the previous parable. In this reaction His grace is expressed. Despite His rejection, He still offers His grace in the invitation to come to the wedding. If they accept the invitation of the gospel, they come under the rule of heaven after the national collapse proposed in the preceding parable has taken place.

It is again a parable, but now in connection with the kingdom of heaven. That distinguishes this parable from the two previous. Those were about the righteous claims the Lord Jesus has on Israel on the basis of what He has confided to them and their response to it. This is about something new, the wedding. With this parable He brings again to light why He came. As in the previous parable, there is mention of a son, this time a son of a king.

The Lord introduces this parable with the words: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to.” This means that He does not announce the kingdom of heaven in its original form. This is no longer possible because of His rejection. By talking about a wedding, He emphasizes the joy that is connected to someone accepting the invitation and attending. In this parable an invitation is issued. The slaves are not ordered to go into the vineyard and work, but to call: “Come to the wedding feast.” There is not demanding, but giving.

The slaves are the disciples whom the Lord has sent out. The guests are first and foremost the Jews, the people of God. But the people don’t want to come, they reject the invitation. However, Christ is full of grace and sends out a second invitation to the same group of particularly privileged persons, the guests. He now instructs His slaves not only to invite, but also to present the attractiveness of the party in the invitation. It is all ready for the guests. They just need to come. He does everything He can to get the guests to the party.

The spiritual meaning is that everything is ready through the sacrifice of Christ. This was not yet the case for the first call. The fulfilment of the second invitation can be seen in the first chapters of Acts. This second invitation is made by the apostles when the work of redemption is completed.

But the guests show no interest. The cause is different. There is one group that is too busy with its own possessions, another group is busy with its business. There is also a group among the guests that react differently. When they receive the invitation, they flare up in anger. This has to do with their pride in their national religion from which they derive their importance. They answered the invitation by mistreating and killing the messengers.

It should come as no surprise that the king cannot let these reactions to his invitation go unpunished. In the year AD 70 God allowed Jerusalem to be destroyed by the Romans as “his armies”.

Matthew 22:28

Those Invited to a Wedding

With the following parable, the Lord reacted on His rejection, which He brought to light in the previous parable. In this reaction His grace is expressed. Despite His rejection, He still offers His grace in the invitation to come to the wedding. If they accept the invitation of the gospel, they come under the rule of heaven after the national collapse proposed in the preceding parable has taken place.

It is again a parable, but now in connection with the kingdom of heaven. That distinguishes this parable from the two previous. Those were about the righteous claims the Lord Jesus has on Israel on the basis of what He has confided to them and their response to it. This is about something new, the wedding. With this parable He brings again to light why He came. As in the previous parable, there is mention of a son, this time a son of a king.

The Lord introduces this parable with the words: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to.” This means that He does not announce the kingdom of heaven in its original form. This is no longer possible because of His rejection. By talking about a wedding, He emphasizes the joy that is connected to someone accepting the invitation and attending. In this parable an invitation is issued. The slaves are not ordered to go into the vineyard and work, but to call: “Come to the wedding feast.” There is not demanding, but giving.

The slaves are the disciples whom the Lord has sent out. The guests are first and foremost the Jews, the people of God. But the people don’t want to come, they reject the invitation. However, Christ is full of grace and sends out a second invitation to the same group of particularly privileged persons, the guests. He now instructs His slaves not only to invite, but also to present the attractiveness of the party in the invitation. It is all ready for the guests. They just need to come. He does everything He can to get the guests to the party.

The spiritual meaning is that everything is ready through the sacrifice of Christ. This was not yet the case for the first call. The fulfilment of the second invitation can be seen in the first chapters of Acts. This second invitation is made by the apostles when the work of redemption is completed.

But the guests show no interest. The cause is different. There is one group that is too busy with its own possessions, another group is busy with its business. There is also a group among the guests that react differently. When they receive the invitation, they flare up in anger. This has to do with their pride in their national religion from which they derive their importance. They answered the invitation by mistreating and killing the messengers.

It should come as no surprise that the king cannot let these reactions to his invitation go unpunished. In the year AD 70 God allowed Jerusalem to be destroyed by the Romans as “his armies”.

Matthew 22:29

Those Invited to a Wedding

With the following parable, the Lord reacted on His rejection, which He brought to light in the previous parable. In this reaction His grace is expressed. Despite His rejection, He still offers His grace in the invitation to come to the wedding. If they accept the invitation of the gospel, they come under the rule of heaven after the national collapse proposed in the preceding parable has taken place.

It is again a parable, but now in connection with the kingdom of heaven. That distinguishes this parable from the two previous. Those were about the righteous claims the Lord Jesus has on Israel on the basis of what He has confided to them and their response to it. This is about something new, the wedding. With this parable He brings again to light why He came. As in the previous parable, there is mention of a son, this time a son of a king.

The Lord introduces this parable with the words: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to.” This means that He does not announce the kingdom of heaven in its original form. This is no longer possible because of His rejection. By talking about a wedding, He emphasizes the joy that is connected to someone accepting the invitation and attending. In this parable an invitation is issued. The slaves are not ordered to go into the vineyard and work, but to call: “Come to the wedding feast.” There is not demanding, but giving.

The slaves are the disciples whom the Lord has sent out. The guests are first and foremost the Jews, the people of God. But the people don’t want to come, they reject the invitation. However, Christ is full of grace and sends out a second invitation to the same group of particularly privileged persons, the guests. He now instructs His slaves not only to invite, but also to present the attractiveness of the party in the invitation. It is all ready for the guests. They just need to come. He does everything He can to get the guests to the party.

The spiritual meaning is that everything is ready through the sacrifice of Christ. This was not yet the case for the first call. The fulfilment of the second invitation can be seen in the first chapters of Acts. This second invitation is made by the apostles when the work of redemption is completed.

But the guests show no interest. The cause is different. There is one group that is too busy with its own possessions, another group is busy with its business. There is also a group among the guests that react differently. When they receive the invitation, they flare up in anger. This has to do with their pride in their national religion from which they derive their importance. They answered the invitation by mistreating and killing the messengers.

It should come as no surprise that the king cannot let these reactions to his invitation go unpunished. In the year AD 70 God allowed Jerusalem to be destroyed by the Romans as “his armies”.

Matthew 22:30

Those Invited to a Wedding

With the following parable, the Lord reacted on His rejection, which He brought to light in the previous parable. In this reaction His grace is expressed. Despite His rejection, He still offers His grace in the invitation to come to the wedding. If they accept the invitation of the gospel, they come under the rule of heaven after the national collapse proposed in the preceding parable has taken place.

It is again a parable, but now in connection with the kingdom of heaven. That distinguishes this parable from the two previous. Those were about the righteous claims the Lord Jesus has on Israel on the basis of what He has confided to them and their response to it. This is about something new, the wedding. With this parable He brings again to light why He came. As in the previous parable, there is mention of a son, this time a son of a king.

The Lord introduces this parable with the words: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to.” This means that He does not announce the kingdom of heaven in its original form. This is no longer possible because of His rejection. By talking about a wedding, He emphasizes the joy that is connected to someone accepting the invitation and attending. In this parable an invitation is issued. The slaves are not ordered to go into the vineyard and work, but to call: “Come to the wedding feast.” There is not demanding, but giving.

The slaves are the disciples whom the Lord has sent out. The guests are first and foremost the Jews, the people of God. But the people don’t want to come, they reject the invitation. However, Christ is full of grace and sends out a second invitation to the same group of particularly privileged persons, the guests. He now instructs His slaves not only to invite, but also to present the attractiveness of the party in the invitation. It is all ready for the guests. They just need to come. He does everything He can to get the guests to the party.

The spiritual meaning is that everything is ready through the sacrifice of Christ. This was not yet the case for the first call. The fulfilment of the second invitation can be seen in the first chapters of Acts. This second invitation is made by the apostles when the work of redemption is completed.

But the guests show no interest. The cause is different. There is one group that is too busy with its own possessions, another group is busy with its business. There is also a group among the guests that react differently. When they receive the invitation, they flare up in anger. This has to do with their pride in their national religion from which they derive their importance. They answered the invitation by mistreating and killing the messengers.

It should come as no surprise that the king cannot let these reactions to his invitation go unpunished. In the year AD 70 God allowed Jerusalem to be destroyed by the Romans as “his armies”.

Matthew 22:31

Those Invited to a Wedding

With the following parable, the Lord reacted on His rejection, which He brought to light in the previous parable. In this reaction His grace is expressed. Despite His rejection, He still offers His grace in the invitation to come to the wedding. If they accept the invitation of the gospel, they come under the rule of heaven after the national collapse proposed in the preceding parable has taken place.

It is again a parable, but now in connection with the kingdom of heaven. That distinguishes this parable from the two previous. Those were about the righteous claims the Lord Jesus has on Israel on the basis of what He has confided to them and their response to it. This is about something new, the wedding. With this parable He brings again to light why He came. As in the previous parable, there is mention of a son, this time a son of a king.

The Lord introduces this parable with the words: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to.” This means that He does not announce the kingdom of heaven in its original form. This is no longer possible because of His rejection. By talking about a wedding, He emphasizes the joy that is connected to someone accepting the invitation and attending. In this parable an invitation is issued. The slaves are not ordered to go into the vineyard and work, but to call: “Come to the wedding feast.” There is not demanding, but giving.

The slaves are the disciples whom the Lord has sent out. The guests are first and foremost the Jews, the people of God. But the people don’t want to come, they reject the invitation. However, Christ is full of grace and sends out a second invitation to the same group of particularly privileged persons, the guests. He now instructs His slaves not only to invite, but also to present the attractiveness of the party in the invitation. It is all ready for the guests. They just need to come. He does everything He can to get the guests to the party.

The spiritual meaning is that everything is ready through the sacrifice of Christ. This was not yet the case for the first call. The fulfilment of the second invitation can be seen in the first chapters of Acts. This second invitation is made by the apostles when the work of redemption is completed.

But the guests show no interest. The cause is different. There is one group that is too busy with its own possessions, another group is busy with its business. There is also a group among the guests that react differently. When they receive the invitation, they flare up in anger. This has to do with their pride in their national religion from which they derive their importance. They answered the invitation by mistreating and killing the messengers.

It should come as no surprise that the king cannot let these reactions to his invitation go unpunished. In the year AD 70 God allowed Jerusalem to be destroyed by the Romans as “his armies”.

Matthew 22:32

Those Invited to a Wedding

With the following parable, the Lord reacted on His rejection, which He brought to light in the previous parable. In this reaction His grace is expressed. Despite His rejection, He still offers His grace in the invitation to come to the wedding. If they accept the invitation of the gospel, they come under the rule of heaven after the national collapse proposed in the preceding parable has taken place.

It is again a parable, but now in connection with the kingdom of heaven. That distinguishes this parable from the two previous. Those were about the righteous claims the Lord Jesus has on Israel on the basis of what He has confided to them and their response to it. This is about something new, the wedding. With this parable He brings again to light why He came. As in the previous parable, there is mention of a son, this time a son of a king.

The Lord introduces this parable with the words: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to.” This means that He does not announce the kingdom of heaven in its original form. This is no longer possible because of His rejection. By talking about a wedding, He emphasizes the joy that is connected to someone accepting the invitation and attending. In this parable an invitation is issued. The slaves are not ordered to go into the vineyard and work, but to call: “Come to the wedding feast.” There is not demanding, but giving.

The slaves are the disciples whom the Lord has sent out. The guests are first and foremost the Jews, the people of God. But the people don’t want to come, they reject the invitation. However, Christ is full of grace and sends out a second invitation to the same group of particularly privileged persons, the guests. He now instructs His slaves not only to invite, but also to present the attractiveness of the party in the invitation. It is all ready for the guests. They just need to come. He does everything He can to get the guests to the party.

The spiritual meaning is that everything is ready through the sacrifice of Christ. This was not yet the case for the first call. The fulfilment of the second invitation can be seen in the first chapters of Acts. This second invitation is made by the apostles when the work of redemption is completed.

But the guests show no interest. The cause is different. There is one group that is too busy with its own possessions, another group is busy with its business. There is also a group among the guests that react differently. When they receive the invitation, they flare up in anger. This has to do with their pride in their national religion from which they derive their importance. They answered the invitation by mistreating and killing the messengers.

It should come as no surprise that the king cannot let these reactions to his invitation go unpunished. In the year AD 70 God allowed Jerusalem to be destroyed by the Romans as “his armies”.

Matthew 22:33

The Wedding Hall Is Filled

The king tells his slaves how things stand and that the guests are not worthy of coming to the wedding. He has sent them the invitation, but they have made themselves unworthy to be present at the wedding. Now he wants to send out his slaves, a picture of the Lord’s servants, to people who were not earlier among the guests. His slaves may, without making any distinction, invite to the wedding all those they find in the main highways. At the main highways you can always find the most people. Now that the guests have turned down the offer of grace from the gospel, the offer goes to all people.

The slaves carry out their task by bringing together, without distinction, all those they find. The gospel is offered to all people. The evangelist does not have to deal with who has been chosen by God. He must bring the Word to all he encounters. By “evil” we can understand great sinners and by “good” people like Nicodemus. It is not about the nature and character of the people to whom the gospel goes, but about the fact that the invitation is made to all without distinction. There is no search for people who wear wedding clothes because they will receive them from the King. It is here as it is in Matthew 13 with the parable of wheat and tares. In this way the wedding is filled with dinner guests.

Matthew 22:34

The Wedding Hall Is Filled

The king tells his slaves how things stand and that the guests are not worthy of coming to the wedding. He has sent them the invitation, but they have made themselves unworthy to be present at the wedding. Now he wants to send out his slaves, a picture of the Lord’s servants, to people who were not earlier among the guests. His slaves may, without making any distinction, invite to the wedding all those they find in the main highways. At the main highways you can always find the most people. Now that the guests have turned down the offer of grace from the gospel, the offer goes to all people.

The slaves carry out their task by bringing together, without distinction, all those they find. The gospel is offered to all people. The evangelist does not have to deal with who has been chosen by God. He must bring the Word to all he encounters. By “evil” we can understand great sinners and by “good” people like Nicodemus. It is not about the nature and character of the people to whom the gospel goes, but about the fact that the invitation is made to all without distinction. There is no search for people who wear wedding clothes because they will receive them from the King. It is here as it is in Matthew 13 with the parable of wheat and tares. In this way the wedding is filled with dinner guests.

Matthew 22:35

The Wedding Hall Is Filled

The king tells his slaves how things stand and that the guests are not worthy of coming to the wedding. He has sent them the invitation, but they have made themselves unworthy to be present at the wedding. Now he wants to send out his slaves, a picture of the Lord’s servants, to people who were not earlier among the guests. His slaves may, without making any distinction, invite to the wedding all those they find in the main highways. At the main highways you can always find the most people. Now that the guests have turned down the offer of grace from the gospel, the offer goes to all people.

The slaves carry out their task by bringing together, without distinction, all those they find. The gospel is offered to all people. The evangelist does not have to deal with who has been chosen by God. He must bring the Word to all he encounters. By “evil” we can understand great sinners and by “good” people like Nicodemus. It is not about the nature and character of the people to whom the gospel goes, but about the fact that the invitation is made to all without distinction. There is no search for people who wear wedding clothes because they will receive them from the King. It is here as it is in Matthew 13 with the parable of wheat and tares. In this way the wedding is filled with dinner guests.

Matthew 22:36

Without Wedding Clothes

Then the king comes in to see who has come in. This parable is not about the responsibility of the preacher, but of those who responded to the preaching. The man without wedding clothes has entered in an arbitrary way. He has mingled with those invited, but did not accept the wedding clothes. He thinks his own clothes will suffice.

This is clearly not about heaven. No one who is not clothed with Christ can enter there. It is a parable of the kingdom of heaven that has become like a situation in which evil and good are present together. However, there will come a day when God will reveal who really belongs in it and who does not.

The man is called to account. The king calls him “friend” because he has come. But the man gives no answer to the question about how he came in without wedding clothes. The imagination by which he thought he could be present there on the basis of his own conditions, has disappeared. So it will be with all people who now have a big mouth about how they will respond to God when He calls them to account.

In this parable we have already seen the judgment on Jerusalem (Matthew 22:7). Because this is a parable of the kingdom, we also see the judgment of what is within the kingdom. There may be an outward entry into the kingdom, a confession of Christendom, but he who is not clothed with what belongs to the feast will be ejected. We must be clothed with Christ Himself. He who is not, is thrown into the outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. The Lord represents the terrible destiny of those who imagine themselves in the light, while their hearts are in darkness. They will be eternally where their hearts always were.

He ends the parable by pointing out once again that many are called, that is to say all people, but few are chosen, that is, not many bow under grace. The fate of this individual in the parable, will in reality be the fate of many.

The twofold test of the nation ends here. The first took place under the responsibility of the nation under the law (Matthew 21:33-46). The second benchmark for them was the message of grace (Matthew 22:1-14).

Matthew 22:37

Without Wedding Clothes

Then the king comes in to see who has come in. This parable is not about the responsibility of the preacher, but of those who responded to the preaching. The man without wedding clothes has entered in an arbitrary way. He has mingled with those invited, but did not accept the wedding clothes. He thinks his own clothes will suffice.

This is clearly not about heaven. No one who is not clothed with Christ can enter there. It is a parable of the kingdom of heaven that has become like a situation in which evil and good are present together. However, there will come a day when God will reveal who really belongs in it and who does not.

The man is called to account. The king calls him “friend” because he has come. But the man gives no answer to the question about how he came in without wedding clothes. The imagination by which he thought he could be present there on the basis of his own conditions, has disappeared. So it will be with all people who now have a big mouth about how they will respond to God when He calls them to account.

In this parable we have already seen the judgment on Jerusalem (Matthew 22:7). Because this is a parable of the kingdom, we also see the judgment of what is within the kingdom. There may be an outward entry into the kingdom, a confession of Christendom, but he who is not clothed with what belongs to the feast will be ejected. We must be clothed with Christ Himself. He who is not, is thrown into the outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. The Lord represents the terrible destiny of those who imagine themselves in the light, while their hearts are in darkness. They will be eternally where their hearts always were.

He ends the parable by pointing out once again that many are called, that is to say all people, but few are chosen, that is, not many bow under grace. The fate of this individual in the parable, will in reality be the fate of many.

The twofold test of the nation ends here. The first took place under the responsibility of the nation under the law (Matthew 21:33-46). The second benchmark for them was the message of grace (Matthew 22:1-14).

Matthew 22:38

Without Wedding Clothes

Then the king comes in to see who has come in. This parable is not about the responsibility of the preacher, but of those who responded to the preaching. The man without wedding clothes has entered in an arbitrary way. He has mingled with those invited, but did not accept the wedding clothes. He thinks his own clothes will suffice.

This is clearly not about heaven. No one who is not clothed with Christ can enter there. It is a parable of the kingdom of heaven that has become like a situation in which evil and good are present together. However, there will come a day when God will reveal who really belongs in it and who does not.

The man is called to account. The king calls him “friend” because he has come. But the man gives no answer to the question about how he came in without wedding clothes. The imagination by which he thought he could be present there on the basis of his own conditions, has disappeared. So it will be with all people who now have a big mouth about how they will respond to God when He calls them to account.

In this parable we have already seen the judgment on Jerusalem (Matthew 22:7). Because this is a parable of the kingdom, we also see the judgment of what is within the kingdom. There may be an outward entry into the kingdom, a confession of Christendom, but he who is not clothed with what belongs to the feast will be ejected. We must be clothed with Christ Himself. He who is not, is thrown into the outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. The Lord represents the terrible destiny of those who imagine themselves in the light, while their hearts are in darkness. They will be eternally where their hearts always were.

He ends the parable by pointing out once again that many are called, that is to say all people, but few are chosen, that is, not many bow under grace. The fate of this individual in the parable, will in reality be the fate of many.

The twofold test of the nation ends here. The first took place under the responsibility of the nation under the law (Matthew 21:33-46). The second benchmark for them was the message of grace (Matthew 22:1-14).

Matthew 22:39

Without Wedding Clothes

Then the king comes in to see who has come in. This parable is not about the responsibility of the preacher, but of those who responded to the preaching. The man without wedding clothes has entered in an arbitrary way. He has mingled with those invited, but did not accept the wedding clothes. He thinks his own clothes will suffice.

This is clearly not about heaven. No one who is not clothed with Christ can enter there. It is a parable of the kingdom of heaven that has become like a situation in which evil and good are present together. However, there will come a day when God will reveal who really belongs in it and who does not.

The man is called to account. The king calls him “friend” because he has come. But the man gives no answer to the question about how he came in without wedding clothes. The imagination by which he thought he could be present there on the basis of his own conditions, has disappeared. So it will be with all people who now have a big mouth about how they will respond to God when He calls them to account.

In this parable we have already seen the judgment on Jerusalem (Matthew 22:7). Because this is a parable of the kingdom, we also see the judgment of what is within the kingdom. There may be an outward entry into the kingdom, a confession of Christendom, but he who is not clothed with what belongs to the feast will be ejected. We must be clothed with Christ Himself. He who is not, is thrown into the outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. The Lord represents the terrible destiny of those who imagine themselves in the light, while their hearts are in darkness. They will be eternally where their hearts always were.

He ends the parable by pointing out once again that many are called, that is to say all people, but few are chosen, that is, not many bow under grace. The fate of this individual in the parable, will in reality be the fate of many.

The twofold test of the nation ends here. The first took place under the responsibility of the nation under the law (Matthew 21:33-46). The second benchmark for them was the message of grace (Matthew 22:1-14).

Matthew 22:40

About Poll-Tax to Caesar

In the rest of the chapter we see different groups in Israel trying to condemn and trap the Lord in His words. But every group that appears before Him comes into the light, His light. In His light their position becomes clear. The first group is that of the Pharisees. They try to tempt Him into a statement that they can use to denounce Him.

The Pharisees do not come themselves, but send their disciples. They involve the Herodians in their devilish plan. This combination of Pharisees and Herodians is only conceivable through a common hatred towards the Lord Jesus. The Herodians are friends of Rome, the Pharisees are enemies of Rome, but in their rejection of the Lord their mutual political enmity disappears and they find each other (cf. Luke 23:12). They put in their disciples’ mouths what they should say. The words of their disciples are their words.

In what they let their disciples say, they bear witness to the impeccability of the Lord. What they say of Him is true, though their motives are evil. He is indeed truthful. He teaches the way of God in truth. He certainly defers to no one, literally “it is not a concern to You about anyone” i.e. He did not seek anyone’s favor. Everything they say of Him is not present in them. They are untrue, they do not teach God’s way in truth, but their own way in lies. They only seek the favor of others. They are leaders who abuse the sheep for their own ends (Ezekiel 34:2).

The question that the envoy must ask the Lord is about giving a poll-tax to Caesar. Is this permissible or not? With this question they think they can get Him to say something incorrect. If He says ‘yes’, they can discredit Him in the eyes of the people. He cannot be the Messiah, because He accepts the rule of the Romans and does not commit Himself to Israel. If He says ‘no’, they can accuse Him before the Romans of an insurrection against authority. Of course the Lord sees through their deceit. He knows their malice. Openly He rebukes them and calls them “hypocrites”.

With authority He commands them to bring Him a coin used for tax. They obey without argument. Then He has a question for them. He points to the coin and asks them “whose likeness and inscription” are on the coin. They can say nothing other than that the likeness and the inscription are both of the emperor. They still do not realize where the Lord wants to go. That is now coming. In perfect divine wisdom He points out the obligations they have, both towards the emperor and towards God. Giving to the emperor means acknowledging that they are under his authority. Giving to God means acknowledging that He came to them in Christ to receive fruit.

The likeness on the coin indicates who it represents, the representative. The inscription on the coin indicates his will. Both are those of the emperor in Rome. This means that they stand there with money in their hands – the Lord has not taken the money in His hand – that they use in their land which is symbolic for their submission to foreign rule. This submission is the result of their stiff-necked refusal to listen to God (cf. Nehemiah 9:33-37). The persistence of their sin is evident from their rejection of Him who stands before them Who is the likeness and inscription of God (Colossians 1:15).

They can only marvel at this answer. They’re finished talking. The Lord has silenced them. Instead of bowing before His majesty and wisdom, they leave Him and go away. They have been defeated, but don’t want to acknowledge that.

Matthew 22:41

About Poll-Tax to Caesar

In the rest of the chapter we see different groups in Israel trying to condemn and trap the Lord in His words. But every group that appears before Him comes into the light, His light. In His light their position becomes clear. The first group is that of the Pharisees. They try to tempt Him into a statement that they can use to denounce Him.

The Pharisees do not come themselves, but send their disciples. They involve the Herodians in their devilish plan. This combination of Pharisees and Herodians is only conceivable through a common hatred towards the Lord Jesus. The Herodians are friends of Rome, the Pharisees are enemies of Rome, but in their rejection of the Lord their mutual political enmity disappears and they find each other (cf. Luke 23:12). They put in their disciples’ mouths what they should say. The words of their disciples are their words.

In what they let their disciples say, they bear witness to the impeccability of the Lord. What they say of Him is true, though their motives are evil. He is indeed truthful. He teaches the way of God in truth. He certainly defers to no one, literally “it is not a concern to You about anyone” i.e. He did not seek anyone’s favor. Everything they say of Him is not present in them. They are untrue, they do not teach God’s way in truth, but their own way in lies. They only seek the favor of others. They are leaders who abuse the sheep for their own ends (Ezekiel 34:2).

The question that the envoy must ask the Lord is about giving a poll-tax to Caesar. Is this permissible or not? With this question they think they can get Him to say something incorrect. If He says ‘yes’, they can discredit Him in the eyes of the people. He cannot be the Messiah, because He accepts the rule of the Romans and does not commit Himself to Israel. If He says ‘no’, they can accuse Him before the Romans of an insurrection against authority. Of course the Lord sees through their deceit. He knows their malice. Openly He rebukes them and calls them “hypocrites”.

With authority He commands them to bring Him a coin used for tax. They obey without argument. Then He has a question for them. He points to the coin and asks them “whose likeness and inscription” are on the coin. They can say nothing other than that the likeness and the inscription are both of the emperor. They still do not realize where the Lord wants to go. That is now coming. In perfect divine wisdom He points out the obligations they have, both towards the emperor and towards God. Giving to the emperor means acknowledging that they are under his authority. Giving to God means acknowledging that He came to them in Christ to receive fruit.

The likeness on the coin indicates who it represents, the representative. The inscription on the coin indicates his will. Both are those of the emperor in Rome. This means that they stand there with money in their hands – the Lord has not taken the money in His hand – that they use in their land which is symbolic for their submission to foreign rule. This submission is the result of their stiff-necked refusal to listen to God (cf. Nehemiah 9:33-37). The persistence of their sin is evident from their rejection of Him who stands before them Who is the likeness and inscription of God (Colossians 1:15).

They can only marvel at this answer. They’re finished talking. The Lord has silenced them. Instead of bowing before His majesty and wisdom, they leave Him and go away. They have been defeated, but don’t want to acknowledge that.

Matthew 22:42

About Poll-Tax to Caesar

In the rest of the chapter we see different groups in Israel trying to condemn and trap the Lord in His words. But every group that appears before Him comes into the light, His light. In His light their position becomes clear. The first group is that of the Pharisees. They try to tempt Him into a statement that they can use to denounce Him.

The Pharisees do not come themselves, but send their disciples. They involve the Herodians in their devilish plan. This combination of Pharisees and Herodians is only conceivable through a common hatred towards the Lord Jesus. The Herodians are friends of Rome, the Pharisees are enemies of Rome, but in their rejection of the Lord their mutual political enmity disappears and they find each other (cf. Luke 23:12). They put in their disciples’ mouths what they should say. The words of their disciples are their words.

In what they let their disciples say, they bear witness to the impeccability of the Lord. What they say of Him is true, though their motives are evil. He is indeed truthful. He teaches the way of God in truth. He certainly defers to no one, literally “it is not a concern to You about anyone” i.e. He did not seek anyone’s favor. Everything they say of Him is not present in them. They are untrue, they do not teach God’s way in truth, but their own way in lies. They only seek the favor of others. They are leaders who abuse the sheep for their own ends (Ezekiel 34:2).

The question that the envoy must ask the Lord is about giving a poll-tax to Caesar. Is this permissible or not? With this question they think they can get Him to say something incorrect. If He says ‘yes’, they can discredit Him in the eyes of the people. He cannot be the Messiah, because He accepts the rule of the Romans and does not commit Himself to Israel. If He says ‘no’, they can accuse Him before the Romans of an insurrection against authority. Of course the Lord sees through their deceit. He knows their malice. Openly He rebukes them and calls them “hypocrites”.

With authority He commands them to bring Him a coin used for tax. They obey without argument. Then He has a question for them. He points to the coin and asks them “whose likeness and inscription” are on the coin. They can say nothing other than that the likeness and the inscription are both of the emperor. They still do not realize where the Lord wants to go. That is now coming. In perfect divine wisdom He points out the obligations they have, both towards the emperor and towards God. Giving to the emperor means acknowledging that they are under his authority. Giving to God means acknowledging that He came to them in Christ to receive fruit.

The likeness on the coin indicates who it represents, the representative. The inscription on the coin indicates his will. Both are those of the emperor in Rome. This means that they stand there with money in their hands – the Lord has not taken the money in His hand – that they use in their land which is symbolic for their submission to foreign rule. This submission is the result of their stiff-necked refusal to listen to God (cf. Nehemiah 9:33-37). The persistence of their sin is evident from their rejection of Him who stands before them Who is the likeness and inscription of God (Colossians 1:15).

They can only marvel at this answer. They’re finished talking. The Lord has silenced them. Instead of bowing before His majesty and wisdom, they leave Him and go away. They have been defeated, but don’t want to acknowledge that.

Matthew 22:43

About Poll-Tax to Caesar

In the rest of the chapter we see different groups in Israel trying to condemn and trap the Lord in His words. But every group that appears before Him comes into the light, His light. In His light their position becomes clear. The first group is that of the Pharisees. They try to tempt Him into a statement that they can use to denounce Him.

The Pharisees do not come themselves, but send their disciples. They involve the Herodians in their devilish plan. This combination of Pharisees and Herodians is only conceivable through a common hatred towards the Lord Jesus. The Herodians are friends of Rome, the Pharisees are enemies of Rome, but in their rejection of the Lord their mutual political enmity disappears and they find each other (cf. Luke 23:12). They put in their disciples’ mouths what they should say. The words of their disciples are their words.

In what they let their disciples say, they bear witness to the impeccability of the Lord. What they say of Him is true, though their motives are evil. He is indeed truthful. He teaches the way of God in truth. He certainly defers to no one, literally “it is not a concern to You about anyone” i.e. He did not seek anyone’s favor. Everything they say of Him is not present in them. They are untrue, they do not teach God’s way in truth, but their own way in lies. They only seek the favor of others. They are leaders who abuse the sheep for their own ends (Ezekiel 34:2).

The question that the envoy must ask the Lord is about giving a poll-tax to Caesar. Is this permissible or not? With this question they think they can get Him to say something incorrect. If He says ‘yes’, they can discredit Him in the eyes of the people. He cannot be the Messiah, because He accepts the rule of the Romans and does not commit Himself to Israel. If He says ‘no’, they can accuse Him before the Romans of an insurrection against authority. Of course the Lord sees through their deceit. He knows their malice. Openly He rebukes them and calls them “hypocrites”.

With authority He commands them to bring Him a coin used for tax. They obey without argument. Then He has a question for them. He points to the coin and asks them “whose likeness and inscription” are on the coin. They can say nothing other than that the likeness and the inscription are both of the emperor. They still do not realize where the Lord wants to go. That is now coming. In perfect divine wisdom He points out the obligations they have, both towards the emperor and towards God. Giving to the emperor means acknowledging that they are under his authority. Giving to God means acknowledging that He came to them in Christ to receive fruit.

The likeness on the coin indicates who it represents, the representative. The inscription on the coin indicates his will. Both are those of the emperor in Rome. This means that they stand there with money in their hands – the Lord has not taken the money in His hand – that they use in their land which is symbolic for their submission to foreign rule. This submission is the result of their stiff-necked refusal to listen to God (cf. Nehemiah 9:33-37). The persistence of their sin is evident from their rejection of Him who stands before them Who is the likeness and inscription of God (Colossians 1:15).

They can only marvel at this answer. They’re finished talking. The Lord has silenced them. Instead of bowing before His majesty and wisdom, they leave Him and go away. They have been defeated, but don’t want to acknowledge that.

Matthew 22:44

About Poll-Tax to Caesar

In the rest of the chapter we see different groups in Israel trying to condemn and trap the Lord in His words. But every group that appears before Him comes into the light, His light. In His light their position becomes clear. The first group is that of the Pharisees. They try to tempt Him into a statement that they can use to denounce Him.

The Pharisees do not come themselves, but send their disciples. They involve the Herodians in their devilish plan. This combination of Pharisees and Herodians is only conceivable through a common hatred towards the Lord Jesus. The Herodians are friends of Rome, the Pharisees are enemies of Rome, but in their rejection of the Lord their mutual political enmity disappears and they find each other (cf. Luke 23:12). They put in their disciples’ mouths what they should say. The words of their disciples are their words.

In what they let their disciples say, they bear witness to the impeccability of the Lord. What they say of Him is true, though their motives are evil. He is indeed truthful. He teaches the way of God in truth. He certainly defers to no one, literally “it is not a concern to You about anyone” i.e. He did not seek anyone’s favor. Everything they say of Him is not present in them. They are untrue, they do not teach God’s way in truth, but their own way in lies. They only seek the favor of others. They are leaders who abuse the sheep for their own ends (Ezekiel 34:2).

The question that the envoy must ask the Lord is about giving a poll-tax to Caesar. Is this permissible or not? With this question they think they can get Him to say something incorrect. If He says ‘yes’, they can discredit Him in the eyes of the people. He cannot be the Messiah, because He accepts the rule of the Romans and does not commit Himself to Israel. If He says ‘no’, they can accuse Him before the Romans of an insurrection against authority. Of course the Lord sees through their deceit. He knows their malice. Openly He rebukes them and calls them “hypocrites”.

With authority He commands them to bring Him a coin used for tax. They obey without argument. Then He has a question for them. He points to the coin and asks them “whose likeness and inscription” are on the coin. They can say nothing other than that the likeness and the inscription are both of the emperor. They still do not realize where the Lord wants to go. That is now coming. In perfect divine wisdom He points out the obligations they have, both towards the emperor and towards God. Giving to the emperor means acknowledging that they are under his authority. Giving to God means acknowledging that He came to them in Christ to receive fruit.

The likeness on the coin indicates who it represents, the representative. The inscription on the coin indicates his will. Both are those of the emperor in Rome. This means that they stand there with money in their hands – the Lord has not taken the money in His hand – that they use in their land which is symbolic for their submission to foreign rule. This submission is the result of their stiff-necked refusal to listen to God (cf. Nehemiah 9:33-37). The persistence of their sin is evident from their rejection of Him who stands before them Who is the likeness and inscription of God (Colossians 1:15).

They can only marvel at this answer. They’re finished talking. The Lord has silenced them. Instead of bowing before His majesty and wisdom, they leave Him and go away. They have been defeated, but don’t want to acknowledge that.

Matthew 22:45

About Poll-Tax to Caesar

In the rest of the chapter we see different groups in Israel trying to condemn and trap the Lord in His words. But every group that appears before Him comes into the light, His light. In His light their position becomes clear. The first group is that of the Pharisees. They try to tempt Him into a statement that they can use to denounce Him.

The Pharisees do not come themselves, but send their disciples. They involve the Herodians in their devilish plan. This combination of Pharisees and Herodians is only conceivable through a common hatred towards the Lord Jesus. The Herodians are friends of Rome, the Pharisees are enemies of Rome, but in their rejection of the Lord their mutual political enmity disappears and they find each other (cf. Luke 23:12). They put in their disciples’ mouths what they should say. The words of their disciples are their words.

In what they let their disciples say, they bear witness to the impeccability of the Lord. What they say of Him is true, though their motives are evil. He is indeed truthful. He teaches the way of God in truth. He certainly defers to no one, literally “it is not a concern to You about anyone” i.e. He did not seek anyone’s favor. Everything they say of Him is not present in them. They are untrue, they do not teach God’s way in truth, but their own way in lies. They only seek the favor of others. They are leaders who abuse the sheep for their own ends (Ezekiel 34:2).

The question that the envoy must ask the Lord is about giving a poll-tax to Caesar. Is this permissible or not? With this question they think they can get Him to say something incorrect. If He says ‘yes’, they can discredit Him in the eyes of the people. He cannot be the Messiah, because He accepts the rule of the Romans and does not commit Himself to Israel. If He says ‘no’, they can accuse Him before the Romans of an insurrection against authority. Of course the Lord sees through their deceit. He knows their malice. Openly He rebukes them and calls them “hypocrites”.

With authority He commands them to bring Him a coin used for tax. They obey without argument. Then He has a question for them. He points to the coin and asks them “whose likeness and inscription” are on the coin. They can say nothing other than that the likeness and the inscription are both of the emperor. They still do not realize where the Lord wants to go. That is now coming. In perfect divine wisdom He points out the obligations they have, both towards the emperor and towards God. Giving to the emperor means acknowledging that they are under his authority. Giving to God means acknowledging that He came to them in Christ to receive fruit.

The likeness on the coin indicates who it represents, the representative. The inscription on the coin indicates his will. Both are those of the emperor in Rome. This means that they stand there with money in their hands – the Lord has not taken the money in His hand – that they use in their land which is symbolic for their submission to foreign rule. This submission is the result of their stiff-necked refusal to listen to God (cf. Nehemiah 9:33-37). The persistence of their sin is evident from their rejection of Him who stands before them Who is the likeness and inscription of God (Colossians 1:15).

They can only marvel at this answer. They’re finished talking. The Lord has silenced them. Instead of bowing before His majesty and wisdom, they leave Him and go away. They have been defeated, but don’t want to acknowledge that.

Matthew 22:46

About Poll-Tax to Caesar

In the rest of the chapter we see different groups in Israel trying to condemn and trap the Lord in His words. But every group that appears before Him comes into the light, His light. In His light their position becomes clear. The first group is that of the Pharisees. They try to tempt Him into a statement that they can use to denounce Him.

The Pharisees do not come themselves, but send their disciples. They involve the Herodians in their devilish plan. This combination of Pharisees and Herodians is only conceivable through a common hatred towards the Lord Jesus. The Herodians are friends of Rome, the Pharisees are enemies of Rome, but in their rejection of the Lord their mutual political enmity disappears and they find each other (cf. Luke 23:12). They put in their disciples’ mouths what they should say. The words of their disciples are their words.

In what they let their disciples say, they bear witness to the impeccability of the Lord. What they say of Him is true, though their motives are evil. He is indeed truthful. He teaches the way of God in truth. He certainly defers to no one, literally “it is not a concern to You about anyone” i.e. He did not seek anyone’s favor. Everything they say of Him is not present in them. They are untrue, they do not teach God’s way in truth, but their own way in lies. They only seek the favor of others. They are leaders who abuse the sheep for their own ends (Ezekiel 34:2).

The question that the envoy must ask the Lord is about giving a poll-tax to Caesar. Is this permissible or not? With this question they think they can get Him to say something incorrect. If He says ‘yes’, they can discredit Him in the eyes of the people. He cannot be the Messiah, because He accepts the rule of the Romans and does not commit Himself to Israel. If He says ‘no’, they can accuse Him before the Romans of an insurrection against authority. Of course the Lord sees through their deceit. He knows their malice. Openly He rebukes them and calls them “hypocrites”.

With authority He commands them to bring Him a coin used for tax. They obey without argument. Then He has a question for them. He points to the coin and asks them “whose likeness and inscription” are on the coin. They can say nothing other than that the likeness and the inscription are both of the emperor. They still do not realize where the Lord wants to go. That is now coming. In perfect divine wisdom He points out the obligations they have, both towards the emperor and towards God. Giving to the emperor means acknowledging that they are under his authority. Giving to God means acknowledging that He came to them in Christ to receive fruit.

The likeness on the coin indicates who it represents, the representative. The inscription on the coin indicates his will. Both are those of the emperor in Rome. This means that they stand there with money in their hands – the Lord has not taken the money in His hand – that they use in their land which is symbolic for their submission to foreign rule. This submission is the result of their stiff-necked refusal to listen to God (cf. Nehemiah 9:33-37). The persistence of their sin is evident from their rejection of Him who stands before them Who is the likeness and inscription of God (Colossians 1:15).

They can only marvel at this answer. They’re finished talking. The Lord has silenced them. Instead of bowing before His majesty and wisdom, they leave Him and go away. They have been defeated, but don’t want to acknowledge that.