Another Puzzling Parable

Hello, again! Glad you dropped by today!

Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Thurs, Jan. 29: Jesus tells the disciple a story about a father and two sons. Which son did what the father wanted? (Matt 21)
Matthew 21:31 31 "Which of the two did what his father wanted?" "The first," they answered. Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you."
BONUS QUESTION: Why?

And here's the question of the day:
Fri, Jan. 30: What is the last plague God sends on Egypt? (Ex 11)

And here's the reflection of the day:
Another Puzzling Parable
It would be a no-brainer to pick an easier piece of Scripture to think about, right? But I've never been one to do things the easy way! (Just ask my mom.) But I have promised myself not to avoid the hard stuff during the Year of the Bible. So, today is another foray into a hard piece of Scripture.


In chapter 21, Matthew tells us that Jesus' authority was challenged (21:23-27). As a response, he tells a series of parables. Ah, parables. . . usually Jesus' convoluted answer to a simple question. Or at least that how we usually feel about them.

According to my handy-dandy "Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms," a parable is "a short story based on common experiences that contains a meaning." Now, it also has a separate entry for "parables of Jesus" that says, "the stories told by Jesus throughout the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) as a way of teaching. They convey meaning, particularly about the major subject of the reign ("kingdom") of God (see Matt 13)."

This wedding banquet parable is the third parable in a series. (The first one is the parable of the two son [Matt 21:28-31] and the second one is the parable of the wicked tenants [Matt 21:33-44]). All three parables are about judgment, BUT this parable concerns judgment on Christians, unlike the first two which concern judgment of the Jews. Now, you may be scratching your head saying, "How did you figure that out?" Well, thanks again to our friend, Douglas R.A. Hare, I have a little explanation.

The king in the story is God. The wedding feast represents the messianic banquet (cf Rev 19:7-9). Those sent to invite the guests are God's prophets and missionaries. The reference to gather "all the people they could find, both good and bad" is meant to include the Gentile mission of the church. Matthew is concerned about the "mixed" state of the church--namely that with the Gentiles came a lot of false prophets and false disciples. So including the Gentiles means bringing the good ones as well as the bad ones.

Now comes the curious case of the wedding guest who was tossed out. This seems like another withered fig tree moment, doesn't it? Nonsensical. Why is the king (aka God) so harsh with this wedding guest? Didn't the king send servants out to invite EVERYBODY to come to the banquet?! It doesn't seem fair that just because he doesn't have nice clothes to wear he's not allowed in, does it?! We want people to come to church no matter how grubby their clothes are, right?

Well, remember, this is a parable and everything has a special meaning. And according to Mr. Hare, the wedding feast represents the "age to come" (aka heaven) and NOT the church. And the required "clothing" for heaven is a garment of righteousness--behavior in accordance with Jesus' teachings (see 28:19). Hare says, "The man is speechless because he has no defense; he accepted the invitation of the gospel, but refused to conform his life to the gospel."

Jesus adds this (at first) disturbing little interlude as an admonishment to Christians, reminding "Christians that they are by no means exempt from the judgment that fell on those who rejected Jesus and the gospel" (p 252). Hare also notes, "The attached saying, 'for many are called, but few are chosen,' should not be taken as a forecast of the proportion of the saved to the damned. Its function is not to frighten Christians with the thought that the statistical odds are against them but to encourage vigorous effort to live the Christian life" (p. 252).

That's a lot to take in, I know. Does that make sense? Click on the "comments" icon below and tell me what you think!

Happy thinking!
Allison

PS Anyone else have the song "I cannot come to the banquet, don't bother me now, I have married a wife, I have bought me a cow, I have fields and commitments, that cost a pretty sum, please hold me excused, I cannot come" going through his/her head?! Oh, Camp Crestfield, how I miss thee. . . .