The Two Sons Matthew 21:28-32 Sept. 28

Matthew 21:28-32  The Parable of the Two Sons

Reader 1)  ‘What do you think? A man had two sons; he went to the first and said,

Reader 2)  “Son, go and work in the vineyard today.”

Reader 1) He answered,

Reader 3) “I will not”;

Reader 1) but later he changed his mind and went. The father went to the second and said the same; and he answered,

Reader 4) “I go, sir”;

Reader 1) but he did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?’ They said,

ALL)  ‘The first.’

1)    Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I tell you, the tax-collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him, but the tax- collectors and the prostitutes believed him; and even after you saw it, you did not change your minds and believe him.

BACKGROUND

MATTHEW 21 records an intensifying issue regarding Jesus authority. It begins with Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem on what we now call Palm Sunday, when the crowds welcomed him as if he were a Messianic king. He also took it upon himself to drive the money changers and other merchants out of the temple, which led the religious authorities to ask, “By what authority are you doing these things?”

Religious authority in the Judaism of Jesus’ time was thought to proceed through the priestly hierarchy, scribes, and the Pharisees. Jesus’ bypasses all that to put God’s authority into  action.

In Matthew and the other “synoptic” gospels Jesus’ divine authority is not often explicitly named, but is left as a kind of open question that the reader was expected to answer for themselves. This is also true of the ministry of John the Baptist.

Matthew’s gospel consistently emphasizes actions over words. The parable of the Two Sons serves as a commentary on Matthew 7:21,  ‘Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord”, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

PALESTINIAN SOCIETY in Jesus’ time was an “honor society” where  appearances were valued more than the underlying reality. Therefore, both the sons in the parable are guilty of dishonoring their father.

The Greek word metamelomai  n Matthew 21: 32= “to change what one cares most about.”

WHAT IS BEING CHALLENGED/SUBVERTED IN THIS PARABLE?

HOW MIGHT THIS PARABLE BE UNDERSTOOD TO CHALLENGE/SUBVERT THE VALUES OF OUR OWN SOCIETY?

HOW MIGHT THIS PARABLE CHALLENGE/SUBVERT MY OWN PERSONAL VALUES OR BEHAVIOR?

SUMMARY

By telling the story in this way, Jesus is calling into question the whole hierarchical structure of the social order.

The religious authorities cannot “change what they care most about”, and continue to regard Jesus and John the Baptist as illegitimate rabble rousers. The tendency of religious authorities to act this way has not gone away.

The kingdom of God is not a theory or a verbal formula. It leads to a change in behavior, and often those who talk about it the most are not the ones who are its agents.

The “Second Son” does not “earn citizenship in the kingdom” by his eventual obedience. Rather, his improved behavior is consequent upon a change of heart.