by Ptr. Art Calaguas
Shalom.
Last time, we saw in Matthew 25:19 the Lord saying: “But after much time, the master of those bondservants comes …” as a signal alerting us to the 3 eschatological themes we have been tracking. As stated earlier, while not explicitly stating the first theme of not knowing the day and hour when the Lord Jesus will return, the parable makes it evident because the master does not give a timetable for his return and just departs immediately after entrusting the talents to the 3 bondservants. The two other themes are paralleled in the master’s expectation for his bondservants to keep watch and do what is proper (with his entrusted wealth); and the lord/master tarries/delays or comes after an extended period of time (compare again with the parable of the wicked bondservant in Matthew 24:45-51 and the Parable of the Ten Virgins in Matthew 25:1-13).
Continuing with the parable, Matthew 25:20-23 narrates the accounting that transpires with the first bondservant entrusted with 5 talents who earned 5 more and the second bondservant entrusted with 2 talents who earned 2 additional talents. The response of their master is exactly the same; verses 25:21 and 25:23 are in fact, identical. The SBL GNT texts are followed by my formal translation:
21ἔφη αὐτῷ ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ· Εὖ, δοῦλε ἀγαθὲ καὶ πιστέ, ἐπὶ ὀλίγα ἦς πιστός, ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω· εἴσελθε εἰς τὴν χαρὰν τοῦ κυρίου σου.
23ἔφη αὐτῷ ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ· Εὖ, δοῦλε ἀγαθὲ καὶ πιστέ, ἐπὶ ὀλίγα ἦς πιστός, ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω· εἴσελθε εἰς τὴν χαρὰν τοῦ κυρίου σου.
His master was saying to him: Well done, good and faithful bondservant; over few (things) you were being faithful, over many (things) I will appoint you; enter into the joy of your master.
Because they were given according to each one’s ability, the master was satisfied as these 2 bondservants performed according to his expectations. This indicates that the Lord knows our character and abilities and the ultimate measure is our faithfulness, our loyalty to the Lord; not exactly how much work we have done for him. This is about justification. It is simply God’s amazing grace and our acceptance of his offer of salvation based on faith; so no one may boast. Perhaps, our output for him with what we are entrusted may result in greater responsibilities appointed for us in this life, or the next.
Matthew 25:24-28 then narrates what happens with the third bondservant who decided to do nothing but just bury his lord’s entrusted talent. This third bondservant makes a presumptive judgment against his own master, labels him a hard man and accuses him of reaping where he did not sow and gathering from where he did not scatter (seed). But this bondservant admits he became afraid and just hid the entrusted talent in the ground. After this, he offered back the single talent to his lord. The master’s response was swift, and included a rhetorical question (with my formal translation):
26ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· Πονηρὲ δοῦλε καὶ ὀκνηρέ, ᾔδεις ὅτι θερίζω ὅπου οὐκ ἔσπειρα καὶ συνάγω ὅθεν οὐ διεσκόρπισα;
But answering, his master said to him: wicked and lazy bondservant, you had known that I reap where I did not sow and gather from where I did not scatter?
The pluperfect verb ᾔδεις comes from εἴδω and its perfect tense οἶδα “eidō” meaning to know or understand or perceive. The pluperfect is a Greek secondary tense that describes an action that had been completed and whose effects are felt after the completion, but all in the past of the speaker. Some translations render the question as “you knew, did you that…?”
The master pointed out that this bondservant was presuming something about him and yet did not even do anything productive. So the master called him lazy. Note that his master did not even ask if this bondservant had the right to judge his lord, while the other 2 carried out their duties faithfully. Perhaps this bondservant was saying something without basis because he did not really know. Colloquially, a “palusot” in the vernacular. The accusations of this bondservant can be deemed as irrelevant, because of the arrangement made by the master with all 3 bondservants before he left for the long journey.
The expectation of the master (based on their prior talent-entrusting arrangement) is seen when he then schools this bondservant in the next verse (with my formal translation):
27ἔδει σε οὖν βαλεῖν τὰ ἀργύριά μου τοῖς τραπεζίταις, καὶ ἐλθὼν ἐγὼ ἐκομισάμην ἂν τὸ ἐμὸν σὺν τόκῳ.
It was necessary for you therefore to put my silverling with the money-changers/bankers, and having come I received back mine with interest.
In Matthew 25:27 the verb ἔδει from δεῖ (“dei” meaning what is absolutely necessary, inevitable, or what must happen; see Luke 24:26 for an even more powerful example of this word’s usage) succinctly captures the expectation of the master. It also turns the bondservant’s argument against him. For if this bondservant really knew that the master was a hard man with all his other negative characterizations, then it behooves this bondservant even more, to invest the lone talent and do what the 2 other bondservants did. This seems to emphasize the second eschatological theme of keeping watch and doing what is proper. But each one has free will to make his own choice(s). The master’s bondservants certainly did; 2 chose wisely while the last did not. The Parable of the Ten Virgins come into view again.
In verse 28 the master then orders the talent to be taken away from this bondservant and given to the (first) one who was having the 10 talents. All of them were probably surprised at this giving of the talent to the most capable one who already had the most. In the next verse the master then makes this judgment declaration (with my formal translation):
29τῷ γὰρ ἔχοντι παντὶ δοθήσεται καὶ περισσευθήσεται· τοῦ δὲ μὴ ἔχοντος καὶ ὃ ἔχει ἀρθήσεται ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ.
For to each one having will be given and he will be abounded; but the one not having even what he has will be taken away from him.
Compare this verse with Matthew 13:12 (in the Parable of the Sower), as well as with Mark 4:24-25 and Luke 8:18. In these similar contexts, it is quite clear that the one who already has will be given more and he will be in abundance and experience overflow (i.e., abounding grace). But for the one who lacks, he will be deprived of even what he has. In the eschatological context of this parable, this becomes an expression of God’s sovereign choice of rewarding or punishing with finality.
Thus, in Matthew 25:30 the unworthy bondservant is cast out into the outer darkness accentuated by “the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.” It segues to the last narrative of the Olivet Discourse with imagery of shepherd, sheep and goats for the Last Judgment.
We will continue next week.
God bless us all.