Mat 22:29 You err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Alternative version: You go astray, not examining the scriptures nor the power of God.

I am reminded of Shakespeare's, "There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Christ's complaint here is that people assume that the afterlife is like this life.

However, Christ goes further, explaining that we can learn about the differences between heaven and earth by examining the scriptures. After all, that is the whole point of our exercise here: to get past the assumption we make about what we "know" concerning the words of Christ. The more I study Christ's words in the original, with all the tools of the internet, the more convinced I am that too many prefer what they think they know to what they can learn.

"Err" is from planaô, which means "to cause to wander," "to lead astry," "to mislead," "to wander," "to stray," and "to be misled."

"Knowing" is from eido, which means "to see," "to examine," and "to know."

"Scriptures" is from graphê, which means "representing by means of lines," "writing," "the art of writing," and "that which is written." It came to mean "scripture" from its use in the Gospels.

"Power" is from dunamis, which means "power," "might," "influence," "authority," "capacity," "elementary force," "force of a word," and "value of money."

Mat 22:21 Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

I think of this line whenever I happen upon a religious show on television that goes on endlessly about how important it is spiritually to give money to their ministry and how God would bless you for doing so. Here, Christ makes it clear that money is not God's concern or what we should be sacrificing to God.

This raises the question, if money is a thing of Caesar, that is, society, what are the things that Christ says we need to give God?

The answer can be found in the previous parable. He wants us to answer God's call and respect his messengers (angelos, in Greek) and care about our relationship with God. The physical, mental, and emotional parts of our lives are all His gifts, but we cannot get stuck in any of them. One must lead to the other and all come from and lead to the spiritual: the pure relationship in which we see God in everything. He wants us to avoid the mistake of getting stuck in one part of life, so we cannot go onto the next part of life.

"Render" is from apodidômi, which means "to give back," "to restore," and "to deliver." It has the economic sense of "to sell" or "to give something for one's own profit."

Mat 22:19 Show me the tax money.
Mat 22:20 Whose [is] this image and superscription?

(Aside: Who knew that the catch phrase, "Show me the money!" was a Bible quote?)

Christ consistently uses money as a symbol for the mental realm in the division of the world into the physical, mental, and emotional. For Christ, all business activity was a matter of thought and communnication. The key to the mental realm is the use of symbols, especially words. Christ makes that connection clear here, pointing to the words and image on the money, showing what it represents: not just the physical gold, but the connection with power.

Our mental activity abstracts the physical world into symbols. These symbols encapsulate information. For information to pass between people, they both must understand the symbols involved. We must code and decode words and ideas using the same system. Christ is pointing out that money is part of this artificial, man-made system of symbols.

Nature also passes information, but its information system is not arbitrary. It is part of the physical nature of things. DNA is more than a code. Its coding and decoding is a chemical process that actually does things. It is both a message and a mechanism in a way that words, which are purely symbolic, are not.

"Tribute" is from kênsos, which means "the tax" or "census."

"Money" is from nomisma, which means "anything sanctioned by current custom or usage," "institution," "coin," "money," and "full legal measure." The closest English equivelent is "currency."

"Image" is from eikôn, which means "likeness," "image," "image in a mirror," "personal description," "semblance," "comparison," and "archetype." It is the source of our word "icon."

"Superscription" is from epigraphê, which means "inscription," "title," "acription," and "description." It is from the verb that means, literally, "to write upon."

Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few [are] chosen.

Alternative Version: For many are invited, but few [are] pure.

This verse comes the end of the parable of the king's son's wedding. It appears right after the guest without a wedding suit is thrown out. It is the second time this line is used. Its first is in Mat. 20:16, which we discuss here.

The usual translation reinforces the idea that the wedding feast is somehow restricted, or, for those who interpret the feast as the afterlife, that few will be chosen to go into heaven. This is confusing, however, because everyone is invited to the wedding feast in the parable. The only one "chosen" is the one man who is ejected. Everyone else gets to stay, so how can they be the "few?"

In the Greek, the meaning is much plainer. The point is that few are truly worthy of the feast, even though everyone is invited to it. The "chosen" are not those specially selected for the feast. They are the few guests that are truly "pure," that is, that are without fault.

There is also another hidden play on words here. Another Greek word, ekklêtos, is a version of the word used for "called" (klêtos) which is very similar to the word used for "chosen" (eklektos), but it means "selected to judge," "to judge a point," and "to arbitrate a point." So the "few" are not only "pure," but those who can judge others.

"Many " is from polus. In number, this means "many." In size, degree, and intensity, it means "much" and "mighty." Of value or worth, it means "of great worth" and "of great consequence." Of space, it means "large" and "wide." Of time, it means "long."

"Called" is from klêtos, which means "invited," "welcome," "called out," "chosen," and "summoned to court."

"Many " is from polus. In number, this means "many." In size, degree, and intensity, it means "much" and "mighty." Of value or worth, it means "of great worth" and "of great consequence." Of space, it means "large" and "wide." Of time, it means "long."

"Chosen" is from eklektos, which means "picked out," "select," "choice," and "pure."

Mat 22:13 Then the king said to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast [him] into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

The fate of the ill-dressed wedding guest also follows three parts following the pattern of physical, emotional, and intellectual. Being bound is the physical part. Being taken away is the emotional. Being cast into the darkness is the mental part. Darkness is a Greek (and Christ's) metaphor for ignorance.

The "binding" of the guest raises a question of freedom. The invited guest were free to reject the invitation. They were not killed except when they first killed the messengers. The guests from the highways were also free to come and free to dress appropriately

As I explain in a more detailed post, my sense is that Christ uses the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth" in same dramatic and almost humorous way that that we say in English "whining and complaining" or "bitching and moaning." The "gnashing of teeth" could indicate the chattering of teeth, conveying the sense that this person is tossed out "in the cold," except that Christ uses this same phrase earlier to describe weeds cast into a fire.

"Servants" is not the usual doulos, ("slave" used earlier in the parable, but diakonos, which is translated in an earlier verse as "minister," from the noun diakonos, which means "servant," "messenger," and "attendant." This is the source for our word "deacon." As a verb, it is from diakoneô, which "to act as a servant," "to minister," and "to perform services." To me, this means that there are two groups of servant: a larger group that took the message to the guest and a special, smaller group that takes the bad guest outside.

"Bind" is from deô, means "to tie," "to bind," "to fetter," and "to keep in bonds." It is a metaphor for chaining. This is the term used earlier for "binding on earth is bound in heaven."
"Take away" is from airo, which primarily means "to lift," and also means "to raise up," "to take up," "to raise a child," "to exalt," "to lift and take away," and "to remove."

"Caste out" is from ekballô and means "throw out," "cast out of a place,"and "expose." Ek means "out of," "from," and "away from." Ballo is "to throw" or "to scatter." The general idea of ballo is "to throw without caring where something falls," so it isn't like putting something into a specific place.

"Darkness" is from skotos, which means "darkness," "gloom," "blindness," and "dizziness." It is a metaphor in Greek for ignorance.

"Weeping" is from klauthmos which means "a weeping."

"Gnashing" is from brugmos , which means "biting," "gobbling," and "chattering."

Mat 22:11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
Mat 22:12 And he said to him, Friend, how did you come in here not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.

Just when we thought the story was over, it has a very important postscrip. The kingdom of heaven isn't only about accepting the invitation to the feast, it is about something more.

Christ uses clothing as a sign of wealth. All matters of wealth are part of the mental realm, which focuses on thoughts and words. This parable is largely about communication, that is, the message of the king about the wedding.

While Christ doesn't want people to get trapped by worrying about wealth and, therefore, there clothing ("the lilies of the field"), his teaching is that the physical-mental-emotional must be connected. Without thought and words, we cannot have relationships. This parable is about the need for us to be aware of the messages otehrs are sending us and we are sending them. Specifically in these verses, this wedding guest's clothing is saying something about his feelings about his relationship with the king.

Christ used the term "wedding garment" in much the same way as we would describe someone wearing their "Sunday best." From my research, the minimum requirement at the time seems to be simply to have clean clothing. Again, like wearing your Sunday best, the idea is to show respect to the host and the other guests.

Notice how kindly the king at first addresses the offending guest. Rather than getting angry, he addresses the man in a friendly way and asks for an explanation. It wasn't until the offending guest offers no explanation that the king becomes insulted, not only because the guest had no good answer but because he didn't giv the king the courtesy of an explanation or asking for forgiveness.

"Garment" is from enduma, which means "garment" or "covering."

"Friend" is from hetairos, which means "comrade," "companion," and "partner." It is a friendly form of address (through it doesn't really mean "friend"), and specifically used to describe a companion at a feast.

"Speechless" is from phimoô, which means "to muzzle," "to be silent," and "to be put to silence."

Mat 22:8 Then he said to his servants, The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy.
Mat 22:9 Go therefore into the highways, and as many as you can find, invite to the wedding.
Mat 22:10 So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.

Remember, this parable is about the kingdom of heaven, the universal law, which is coming to us all. Here, the message from the king finally finds an audience. The invited guests couldn't head that message because they were too busy with their business lives. In Christ's use of symbols, both a message, that is, words, and business, that is, money, belong to the realm of the mind. When your mind is filled with thoughts of business, which depends on the existing order, you cannot get the message about a new, possible order.

Who can get that message? In these verses we find out.

Why does the king send his servants to the highways? The translation is a little confusing. The diexodos was the area just outside a city's gates where the road ended. This is where a variety of people gathered: people from the countryside coming to the city, people looking for work, people waiting for a caravan, and so on. These people were transients, going or coming from somewhere else, or just people who had nowhere to go looking for an opportunity. They camped outside the city by the road because it was cheaper than staying in the city.

The terms used for "good" and "bad" are closer in meaning to "productive" and "worthless." The "worthless" were those that were by the highway because they had nothing else to do and nowhere else to go. The "productive" were those who had jobs and homes but who were simply in transition.

So, those who can hear the message are those caught in between one thing and another. This includes both those looking for a situations in life and those whose lives are in transition, from one thing to the next. These people are open to hearing something new, something different because they are already unsettled and not focused on what they "should" be doing.


"Worthy" is from axios, which means "having weight," "counterbalancing," and "worth" in the sense of one thing balancing another.

"Highways" is from diexodos, which means "outlet," "passage," "roads out of town," and "way out from." Literally, it means "through exit."

"Bad" is from poneros and "good" is from agathos. As we discuss extensively in this page, these terms mean "worthless" and "good" in the sense of doing good deeds respectively. "Good" is from agathos, which "good" and, when applied to people, "well-born," "gentle," "brave," and "capable." When applied to things, it means "serviceable," "morally good," and "beneficial." Agathos is not the usual term translated as "good," in the Gospels, which is kalos, meaning "beautiful."

Mat 22:6 And the rest took his servants, and treated [them] spitefully, and slew [them].
Mat 22:7 But when the king heard, he was angry: and he sent out his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.

Both this parable and the previous one about the vineyard owner and his renters come to a very bloody end. Christ makes his points as dramaticaly as possible. In the previous verse, the vineyards owner's servant, his son, and the renters all ended up dead. Here, the kings servants and the invited guests as all killed and their city burnt. These particular parables are like Shakespearean tragedies where the main actors all end up dead. Only the owner/king is left alive at the end.

Notice that Christ is not condemning the violence on the part of the owner/king. Indeed, he is justifying it. Many modern Christian clerics may condemn the death penalty for murderers, but Christ took it for granted that those who killed would end up dying at the hands of those who help power. Remember, Christ likens the kingdom of heaven as the universal rule to this ruler and what he does.

Notice the pattern. The last verse was about they way the invited guests rejected the relationship and pursued their own interest. The king also reacts emotionally to the guests message. Here, Christ is saying that this emotional rejection leads to death.

Notice again the three steps in the actions taken by both the invited guests and king. The invited follow the pattern of physical (taking), mental (treating spitefully), and ending with emotional (killing.) The king's pattern is a different. He sent his army (mental), then killed (emotional), and then burned the city (physical).

"Took" is from krateô, which means "rule," "hold sway," "conquer," "prevail," "lay hold of," "secure," "control," and "command."

"Treated spitefully" is from hubrizô, which "to treat despitefully," "to outrage," "to insult," and "to mistreat."

"Slew" is from apokteinô, which is a stronger form of the verb "to kill" and "to slay."

"Angry" is from orgizo, which means "to be made angry," "to be provoked to anger," and "to be irritated."

"Sent out" is from pempô, which means "to send," "to send forward," "to shoot," and "to escort."

"Destroyed" is from apollumi, which is a very string form of "to destroy," "to kill," "to slay," and "to lose." It is translated as "lost" and "perish" elsewhere in Matthew. It means "to destroy utterly." It also means "to ruin" a woman.

"Burned" is from emprêthô, which means "to blow up," "to inflate," and "to burn."

Mat 22:5 But they made light of [it], and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:

In this verse, the focus is on the emotional reaction of those invited to the king's son's wedding and what they considered more important, their business interests. Symbolically, this is putting the mental realm of business above the emotional realm of relationships. The word translated as "make light" means specifically about neglecting or rejecting relationships.

"Make light of [it]" is from ameleô, which means "to have no care for," "to be neglectful of," and "to be careless." In its passive form, it means "to be slighted," and "to be overlooked."

Mat 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were invited to the wedding: and they would not come.
Mat 22:4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are invited, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and [my] fatlings [are] killed, and all things [are] ready: come to the marriage.

Th repeated trips by servants from the king represents a pattern in many of Christ's parables. The specific analogy here is of God sending prophets to Israel, with Israel in the role of the invited one. However, there is a larger idea here of God giving us all repeated opportunities to hear his message.

As we have noted in several parables, Christ's uses three types of symbols in his parables representing the physical, mental, and emotional realm by action, talk, and relationships respectively. Usually, each repeated step of the story symbolizes one of these three realms, often as cycles within cycles.

Here, the symbols are mixed together in each stage of the story. The wedding feast itself is symbolic of an emotional relationship, but so is the indifference of the guests and the anger of the king (in a latter verse). At each stage of the story a message is passed and decisions are made, representing the mental realm. Also, at each stage of the story, physical actions are taken--the meals prepared, the servants slain, and finally the invited guests slain.

In these two verses, the emphasis is on sending a message about the immediate physical benefits of the relationship, that is, the feast being offered.

"Prepare" is from hetoimazô , which means "to get ready," and "to prepare."

"Dinner" is from ariston, which originally meant "breakfast" but later meant "luncheon."

Mat 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king, who arranged a marriage for his son,

This time, the kingdom of heaven is compared to a king. It is not compared to the a wedding feast inself. The kingdom of heaven is compared specifically to a "king of men," (anthropos basileus) not just a "certain king" as we see in the KJV. This fits with our general interpretation of Greek for "kingdom of heaven" (basileia ouranos) as "the universal rule" rather that a place, specifically the afterlife. What Christ is saying is that "the universal rule," that is, God's reign, or the way God works, is like the decision-making processed of a king, who is planning a wedding. It is not the wedding (or afterlfe) itself.

The universal rule is the divine law. That law works just like the decision-making process of this earthly king in this specifical situation, that is, planning a wedding. While the wedding might be compared to the afterlife, it is not the "kingdom of heaven" itself.

Mat 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call those that were invited to the wedding: and they would not come.

Notice that not everyone is invited to this event, only as select few. Would this be the case if the point of the parable was to compare "the kingdom of heaven" to the afterlife? Instead, here, we see the rule of heaven as being initially offered to a select group. That group could originally been seen as the tribe of Israel, but Christ is specifically addressing the chief priest and Pharisees. More universally, we might this of those who were invited first as all who have been offered morale teaching.

"To call" and "were invited" are from the same Greek word, kaleô, which means "to call," "to summon," "to be called by a name," and "to name."

"Marriage" and "wedding" are both from the from gamos, which means "marriage," "wedding," and "wedlock."

At the end of some chapters, we can often see how Christ's statements ties together into a larger pattern. Chapter 21 is particularly difficult of overviews because it contains the largest range of topics for Christ words so far in the Gospels. His statements in this chapter touch on:
- Getting an ass on which to ride into Jerusalem
- Chasing money lenders out of the temple
- That babies cries are the perfect form of prayer
- Faith can move mountains
- Refusing to address where his authority (and John's) comes from
- The parable of the two sons who speak and act differently regarding a father's orders
- That harlots and publicans will go into heaven before some religious
- The parable of the vineyard owner and his rebellious renters
- The capstone that was rejected

The overall topic here seems to be the connection between need, faith, action, and leadership. People (starting with babies) should not be afraid to express their needs with confidence that God will address them. This faith in God is the source of the greatest power and authority. This faith is not expressed in what we say, but in what we do. Our faith now is important, not the mistakes we have made in the past. Everything we produce is, at it root, a gift from God. People initially reject those who have the purest faith because they don't fit in, but their uniqueness is the source of their leadership and the value they produce.

There is an intimate connection between what we believe, what we do, our relationship with each other and our relationship with God.

Mat 21:44 And whoever falls on this stone shall be broken: but on whoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.

Alternative: And whoever falls before this stone shall be crushed together: but upon whom it falls, it will break him to pieces.

I think there is a very serious mistranslation here in the KJV. Also, your understanding this verse again depends on first understanding Matt 21:42 where Christ describes himself as the uneven capstone.

The play on words here uses the various meanings of "to fall" (piptô) and epi, which means "on," and "before." To understand what Christ means, you have to keep in mind his double meaning of "head of the corner" both as the capstone, which holds a wall together, and as the crowning of a leader.

What stone "fall before" the capstone? Those that are placed under it in the wall. Which people "prostrate themselves in front of" the crowning of a ruler? Those who accept his rule. In both cases, the capstone and the crowning of a leader crushes or holds these people together. The leader protects his people like a capstone protects the wall. What happens, however, should the capstone or a leader "fall upon" someone? They are broken to pieces. So the basic contrast here is between those who are crushed together and those who are broken apart.

However, there is even more going on here. Those who are "broken apart" and not just destroyed. They are "winnowed," that is, the wheat is separated from the chaff, so, in a sense, the evil is crushed out of them.


"Shall fall" in both cases is from piptô, which means "to fall," "to fall down," "to be cast down," and "to fall upon." It also means "to descend to a prostrate position," as one does when worshiping.

"On" is from epi , which means "on," "upon," "at," "by," "before," "across," and "against."

"Shall be broken" is from sunthlaô, which means "to crush together."

"Grind to powder" is from likmaô, which means "to winnow" that is, separate chaff from grain by thowing up up in the air. It also is used as a metaphor for "to scatter," "to crush," and "to destroy."

Mat 21:43 Therefore I tell you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation who shall bring out the fruits from it.

Alternative version: Therefore I tell you, God's rule shall be raised up from you, and given to the Gentiles who shall produce fruit from it.

In the context of discussing the capstone, the KJV translation of "taken from you" doesn't make great sense. However, if we understand the last verse correctly, it makes perfect sense. Christ is saying that he is the capstone of the wall that built upon the foundation of Israel. His work elevates God's reign up from the Jews and gives it to the Gentiles.

Notice that Christ uses the "kingdom of God" (basileia theos) here, not "the kingdom of heaven," the God's rule and not the universal rule.

"Shall be taken" is from aeirô , which means "to raise up," "elevate," "to bear," "to carry off," "to take and apply to any use," and "to cause to cease."

"Nation" is from ethnos, which means "a number of people living together," "caste," "tribe" or "nation," and implies a foriegn group. It is almost always translated as "Gentiles" in the New Testament.

"Bring forth" is from poieô, which has two general meanings of "make" and "do." In the sense of "make" it means "produce," "bring into existence," "bring about," and "cause." In the sense of "do," it means "to act" and "to be effective."

"Fruit" is karpos, which means both the fruit of trees and the fruit of your actions. In the later sense, it means "return" or "profit" as in a good tree produces good fruit.

Mat 21:42 Did you never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

Here is a verse that few people today can understand without study. As a matter of fact, I have seen some "official" English translations that get it exactly wrong, confusing a capstone with a cornerstone, which is to exactly miss Christ's point. In the original Greek, there is also an interesting play on words about capstones and leaders that is completely lost in English.

After we go through the analysis, you will see that Christ is making the specific point that a leader of the community is different from regular citizens, like the capstones are different from the rest of the stones in the wall including the foundation stones. The regular stones have to be square, consistent in size and shape. They have to "fit into" the wall just like regular citizens have to "fit into" society. Capstones cannot fit in in the same sense and retain their value. The must have an odd angle that doesn't fit in. In the same way, a leader must "stand out" from the crowd. Leaders are often initially rejected because they are different. Capstones are also initially rejected because they have this odd angle.

The first meaning of "head of the corner" comes from the technique of coping an exterior wall. The coping is the final, finishing layer of stone that protects the rest below. The coping layer in a brick or stone wall is slanted so that it sheds water, protecting the wall. This is the opposite of a cornerstone, which holds the weight of the foundation, both figuratively and physically. The cornerstone, like other stones in the way must be as square as possible to make the wall stand straight. The capstone however is slanted. If it wasn't in wouldn't work. Both cornerstones and capstones are larger than the average stone, but for different reasons.

Why is this important? Christ is teaching something very important here about what works. Something that works in most situations, such as the square stones in a wall, does not work in key situations, that is, for the top, protecting layer of a wall. Builders reject stones that aren't square, but they save them for the coping layer on top. Christ is not describing something special or stupid in rejecting a slanted stone, but something that is normally done by people who know how to build.

This idea continues in the second meaning of "head of the corner." The alternative meaning of this phrase comes from alternative meaning in Greek for both "head" and "corner."

Another meaning of "head" in Greek is "the crown," in the sense of the top of someone's head, which came to mean the regal adornment of the head. This idea of "crown" originally was that of a "finish touch," like we might say "a crowning achievement." We use "head" somewhat negatively, as in "having a situation come to a head," that is, come to crisis, but in Greek, to put a "head" or "crown" on something was to finish it completely, like we might say, "put a cherry on top." Of course, from this idea came the idea of "crowning" a leader. (Note: Not to be confused with the circlet of metal or leaves that Greeks used as crowns, which were called stephanos.)

This brings us to "corner." In Greek, another meaning for "corner" is "a leader of a people." We don't use the word "corner" similarly, but the meaning is easier to understand if you think of the corners as supporting a structure, like a pillar does. We doe say a "pillar of the community" to describe a leader. In Greek, they would say "the corner of a community" in the same sense.

The original saying that Christ is quoting came from the Old Testament, specifically Psa 118:22. The rest of the Psalm is unremarkable, very like many others. This one line sticks out. As the son of a brick layer and house builder (mistranslated into English as a "carpenter"), Christ would have understood the meaning of this stanza. This line is prophetic, describing Christ's life as one that would have an odd angle on things, so much so that he made plays on words like this one.

Also, thinking about this a little more deeply, Christ saw himself as the capstone of Jewish teaching, that is, the finishing touch on the wall. The foundation of that wall was the Patriarchs (see Isa 28:16). Christ, however, finished it, crowned it, and protected it.

"Scriptures" is from graphê, which means "drawing," "writing," "the art of writing," "that which is written," "a list," "a prescription," and "official records."

"Stone" is from lithos, which means "a stone," "stone as a substance," and various specific types of stones, such as touchstones, and altar stones.

"Rejected" is from apodokimazô, which means specifically "reject on scrutiny," "reject as unfit or unworthy," and "reject for want of qualifications."

"Head" is from kephalê, which means "head of a man or beast," "an extremity," "the top," "the capital (top) of a pillar," "the coping of a wall," "the source of a rivalry," and, metaphorically the "crowning" or "completion" of a thing.

"Corner" is from gônia, which means "corner," "angle," "a quarter of a compass," and "a leader of people."

"Marvelous" is from thaumastos, which means "wonderful," "marvelous," "admirable," "excellent," and "to be worshipped."

Mat 21:40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those husbandmen?

Christ often ends his analogies with a question for the crowd. His goal is to make people think. The answer to this question, that the husbandmen deserve death. The crowd goes further, however, realizing that the vineyard will be given to other, mkore deserving people.

In using parables, Christ is telling us that the way God works isn't a complete mystery. It makes sense. In using this questions, Christ is telling us that we can figure out the mind of God for ourself. We just have to see things from the right perspective.

Stories like this should make those who claim that Christ was a socialist pause. Here, we have some people, the husbandmen, practicing socialism. As the workers, they feel they have a right to the product of their work. They feel free to not only ignore the rights of the landowner, but to kill his representatives and even his son for their "freedom."

Christ makes it clear that this is not the way the world works. It is not the way God works. Socialism, at its heart, is the desire to remake the rules of nature according to our own desires. We do not make those rules. God does.

"Come" is from erchomai, which means "to come" and "to go." It means "to set out" and "to arrive at." It is a little like we use the phrase "he is on his way,"or "to be under way," which can mean either that he is coming or going with no direct reference to the position of the speaker.

"Do" is from poieô, which has two general meanings of "make" and "do." In the sense of "make" it means "produce," "bring into existence," "bring about," and "cause." In the sense of "do," it means "to act" and "to be effective."

Mat 21:37 But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.
Mat 21:38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
Mat 21:39 And they caught him, and cast [him] out of the vineyard, and slew [him].

Again, Christ uses the repeated pattern of physical, mental, and emotional three times to create a cycle within each cycle. If this pattern was an accident in the previous passages, can its repetition here be a coincidence as well?

The vineyard owner is represents the physical (as a symbol of God the Father as creator of the universe). His physical, mental, and emotional cycle is the action ("sent"), the thought ("saying") and the expected relationship ("reverence my son").

The decision-making of the "husbandmen," that is, the sharecroppers, is the mental part of the cycle. This decision-making starts with the physical symbolized as it usually is by sight ("saw the son"), them moves to the mental symbolize as usually by talking ("said among themselves"), and finally moving to a decision about relationship ("kill him and seize his inheritance").

The cycle is repeated a third time, defining the relationship. Again, there are three steps, but this time they are in a little different sequence. The pattern here is physical ("caught"), emotional, ("cast [him] out of the vineyard"), and mental ("slew him").

"Reverence" is from entrepô, which means "to turn [something] about," "to make one turn," and, as a metaphor, for "putting one to shame." In its passive form (entrapêsomai, not used here) it means "to turn [yourself] about," "to feel misgivings," "to hesitate," "to give heed," "to respect," and "to reverence."

"Heir" is from klêronomos, which means "heir" and "heir apparent."
"Inheritance" is from klêronomia, which means "inheritance," "property," and "possession."

"Caught" is from "lambanô, which means "to take," "to seize," "to catch," "to apprehend with the senses," "to receive," "to accept," and "to conceive." It is most commonly translated as "receive" in the Gospels.

Mat 21:35 And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
Mat 21:36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
Mat 21:37 But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.

Why are there three trips to the vineyard? Why do the first three servants in this tale meet three different fates? Christ is telling us something specific but what? After studying Christ's words for so long, this pattern of three is Christ's most common pattern for explaining the world in terms of the physical, mental, and emotional (relationships). Of course, underlying each of these temporal realities is the deeper, eternal reality of the spiritual, which Christ touches upon in this parable later on.

The first servants represent the physical element and so their fates are described in more physical terms. The second group of servants represents the mental so their specific fates are left to the imagination. The third visit, by the son of the landowner, is about relationships, which we will discuss in more detail in the next post.

The three forms of death that meet the first (physical) group of servants falls into the same pattern. The first death is the most physical and the most painful, being flayed alive ("beat" is a mistranslation, see below). The skin symbolizes the physical surface of reality, appearances. The mental death is symbolized by the decision to kill. The death of relationship is stoning which symbolized a rejection of a relationship. Stoning was the specific death chosen for those who were unfaithful in relationships. The very act of casting stones at someone brands them as an outcast, chasing them away from a relationship.

This line touches on an important aspect of Christ's teaching the use of the cycle within another cycle. Christ not only breaks down the temporal world into a process of the physical, mental, and emotional (relationships) but he further dissects each of these realms into components that are themselves physical, mental, and emotional.

The body gives rise to purely physical actions such as the beating of our hearts. It also gives rise to purely physical thoughts such as hunger or sexual desire. It also gives rise to purely physical relationships, such being someone child or parent.

The mind gives rise to physical actions that are driven purely by thought, such a productive work. The mind also creates purely mental constructs, such as mathematics. The mind also defines purely calculated relationships, such as choosing a job or a business partner.

Finally, emotions (relationships) also create actions, such as crying, which are not driven either by the body or the mind. Emotion also drives our happy, sad, angry, or jealous thoughts independent of our physical needs or mental calculations. Finally, emotions also drive our relationships.


"Beat" is from derô, which means "to flay" or "to skin" someone, though in later use it came to mean "to cudgel" or "to thrash."

"Killed" is from apokteinô, which is a stronger form of the verb "to kill" and "to slay."

"Stoned" is from lithoboleô, which means "to pelt with stones."

Mat 21:34 And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.

The economic assumption here is that ownership of land (or means of production, if you want to get all Marxian) deserves profit from the produce of the land. The fact that the "husbandmen" do all the work does not mean that they should get all the benefit. The owner expects a profit.

In this analogy, the landowner is symbolic of God. Again, the landowner is the opposite of evil. He is the one who provides the means of production for those who have nothing but their own time. Without God, we would have no means to be productive.

"The time of" is from kairos, which means "due measure," "proportion," "fitness," "exact time," "advantage," "profit," and "in season."

"Fruit" is karpos, which means both the fruit of trees and the fruit of your actions. In the later sense, it means "return" or "profit" as in a good tree produces good fruit.

"Receive" is from lambanô, which means "to take," "to seize," "to catch," "to apprehend with the senses," "to receive," "to accept," and "to conceive."