by Bill Moseley

In Matthew 20:1-17 we have the record of the well known parable of Jesus. What was Jesus’ purpose in this parable? Was he saying that, as we are commonly told, that it makes no difference how long a man serves in the kingdom, his reward will be the same? Will a man who obeys the gospel today and dies tomorrow have the same reward as one who has labored in God’s kingdom for many years? No doubt that is true – and we can be thankful that it is. I fear, however, that such an application is all some get out of the great story. We often come to Matthew 20 and completely forget what has gone on immediately before. Perhaps that is because there is a "chapter break" there. While these are handy in Bible study, they can sometimes cause us to isolate one chapter from another. It seems that many do this when it comes to this chapter.

This parable no doubt has it’s roots at least as far back as the story of the rich, young ruler (Matt. 19:16-22). Once that young man sorrowfully left Jesus, the Lord then had to explain some things to his disciples regarding such matters (Matt. 19:23-30). Peter responded to the Lord (Matt. 19:27), in effect saying, "Lord, we have done precisely what you told the young ruler to do. How now is that going to affect us?" He did not seem to understand the true point Jesus was making, which is summed up in Matthew 19:30 – "Many who are first will be last, and the last first." That must have also thrown the disciples another of the proverbial "curve balls!" Jesus often had to "draw a picture" for the disciples, even as he would have had to do for most of us had we been there. And so he sets forth the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, and does so by way of explaining what he said in Matthew 19:30. Note Matthew 20:8, where Jesus again talks about "the last to the first;" he has not abandoned what he said in 19:30. Let us go to the end of the parable (v. 16) where he concludes by saying, "so the last will be first, and the first last." This thought permeates the parable.

The parable was never intended to set forth some sort of rules for a worker’s union that determined, among other things, wages that should be paid. Nor does the "first" or "last" refer to relative positions in the kingdom of God. That is a kingdom where there are no "second class citizens." How is it that the "last" to enter to enter the Master’s "work force" will be paid as much as he that is "first?" One reason is that he has not spent as much time in the vineyard as those who had been there longer. It might be that he has not spent as much money, or utilized his talents as much. In other words, he has a smaller "investment" in the kingdom, whereas those who went out first had a greater investment. Yet their rewards are the same. We might illustrate the principle in the following scenario. Pat purchases a one hundred thousand dollar life insurance policy, and has been paying on it for 20 years. His friend Mike buys the identical policy, but he only bought it yesterday. Mike then dies one day after buying his policy, and guess what? His "benefits" are the same as those of Pat who had paid on his for 20 years! We can understand that, and it is the same principle Jesus lays down in this great parable.

When Peter said, "Lord, we have left all and followed you," did he and the other apostles "give up" any more than the rich, young ruler was called upon to give up? No – and neither are we! So, if we have a problem with the "wages" that were paid to the various workers in the parable, we need to remember that when Jesus spoke the parable, he was doing nothing more than explaining what he said in Matthew 19:30, for he concludes that story with the same principle in Matthew 20:16.

- Bill Moseley, 124 Cornelson Dr., Greer, SC 29651