by Ptr. Art Calaguas
Shalom.
Before continuing with the final judgment scene in Matthew 25:31-46 featuring the Great Shepherd separating the sheep from the goats, we will briefly explore a parallel text from the Gospel of Luke.
Earlier, we saw in Matthew 25:29 the master makes the judgment that the faithful and worthy one who already has will be given more and he will have abundance and overflow. But for the unfaithful and unworthy one who lacks, he will even lose what he has. It was pointed out that this verse is comparable with Matthew 13:12, as well as with Mark 4:24-25 and Luke 8:18 (all in the context of the Parable of the Sower and the 4 Soils).
Luke 19:26 also has a similar text but in a different context. It is part of the Parable of the Minas in Luke 19:11-27. While not formally part of Luke’s version of the Olivet Discourse, this pericope parallels Matthew 25:14-30 in many ways.
The Parable of the Minas in Luke 19:11-27 immediately follows the redemption story of Zaccheus, a chief tax collector in Jericho. After this parable, the Lord Jesus makes his way into Jerusalem in Luke’s version of the Triumphal Entry; followed by the clearing of the Temple.
Even if this Parable of the Minas comes earlier than the Olivet Discourse (chapter 21) of Luke’s gospel, it resonates so well with the Parable of the Talents in Matthew 25:14-30. The parable in Luke 19:11-27 was told by the Lord Jesus while going to Jerusalem from Jericho as his disciples seemed to think that the kingdom of God was about to immediately appear. They were probably reacting to the wonderful salvation that had come upon Zaccheus.
The parable starts in verse 12 about a man of noble birth who goes to a distant land to receive or take a kingdom for himself and leaves some investible/tradeable money (μνᾶ “mna” meaning mina; a monetary unit equivalent to 100 denarii or 100 days’ wages of a laborer) to 10 of his bondservants. He gave a mina to each one and specifically commanded them to trade/transact business with the minas until he returned. In verse 14, it is stated that the nobleman’s fellow citizens were hating him and sent a delegation after him saying that they were not willing to let this man reign over them. [This part of the parable, injects an allegorical flavor as Josephus wrote in Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVII, Chapter 9.1, that when Herod the Great died, one of his sons, Archelaus, actually sailed to Rome to ask Augustus Caesar to appoint him to be king of the Jews. Josephus further says in the succeeding Chapter 11.1-2 that 50 Jewish ambassadors went to Rome after Archelaus to let the Romans know that they did not want him to be king over them.] In verse 15, after some time, the nobleman returns, having received the kingdom and had the 10 bondservants he had given the 10 ἀργύριον (“argurion” silverlings; minas) called to find out what had been earned or gained (in business).
The first bondservant who reported was able to get 1 mina to produce 10 additional minas. The second was able to get the mina to yield 5 additional minas. But another bondservant did not invest the talent at all; he just kept it away wrapped in a handkerchief (he did not have to bury it as this mina is probably just 1 physical coin unlike the talents in Matthew’s parable) and gave it back to his master. The 2 bondservants who made their entrusted minas grow were praised by their master and given new appointments. The one who did not obey his master’s instructions and did nothing was condemned. The parable does not mention anything about the other 7 bondservants but we may assume that they were also able to get positive gains for the minas given to them as only 1 bondservant (the one who did nothing) was condemned. In Luke 19:27 the king then had those who did not want him to rule over them executed in his presence. [Josephus does not have a record of this.]
The similarities and parallels are obvious. But there are some distinctive differences as well. For example, the productivity of the first bondservant is astounding; from 1 mina to 10 more. Likewise, the second bondservant produced 5 additional minas from the 1 he started with. While the joy of the master/king was similar to the reaction of the master in the Parable of the Talents in Matthew, albeit with less exuberance; the rewards given in this Parable of the Minas in Luke appears to be more extravagantly generous and greater. Here is Luke 19:17 narrating the reaction of the king to the first bondservant who made 10 more minas (with my formal translation):
17καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· Εὖγε, ἀγαθὲ δοῦλε, ὅτι ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ πιστὸς ἐγένου, ἴσθι ἐξουσίαν ἔχων ἐπάνω δέκα πόλεων.
And he said to him: Well done, good bondservant; because in very little you became faithful, be having authority on top of ten cities.
For the second bondservant who made 5 more minas, the king generously gave him authority over 5 cities. The exaggeration serves its purpose of projecting a generous king/master/lord who knows how to reward his faithful servants. After all, how can one compare the value of a mina versus the authority over a city?
For the unfaithful, unproductive bondservant, this parable in Luke has the king exhibit the same angry reaction similar to the master in the talents parable in Matthew. The 2nd eschatological theme of the Lord expecting his stewards to do the proper thing while waiting for his coming is discernible. The mina was taken away from this bondservant and given to the one who had the most; similar to the parable in Matthew. As expected, those around were surprised that the one who had the most would be the recipient. Then, the following verse, Luke 19:26 has the king say it this way in Greek (with my formal translation):
26λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι παντὶ τῷ ἔχοντι δοθήσεται, ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ μὴ ἔχοντος καὶ ὃ ἔχει ἀρθήσεται.
I say to you(pl) that to each one having will be given, but from the one not having even what he has will be taken away.
As we had seen earlier, Matthew 25:29 says it this way (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.
Looking at the differently highlighted words, we can conclude that both in Greek and in English, Luke 19:26 parallels Matthew 25:29.
The judgment of the worthless bondservant is not made explicit in Luke while his fate in the outer darkness is spelled out in Matthew’s version. In Luke 19:27 as stated earlier, the concluding verse tells about the fate of those who were opposing the king. It would seem that the situation regarding the bad steward paled in comparison to the immediate death sentence meted out for those against the king.
Evidently, this Parable of the Minas in Luke 19:11-27 fits right in with the end-times focus of the Olivet Discourse.
We will continue next week.
God bless us all.