6. The Parable of the Talents, 25:14–30
14 “For it is like a man going
abroad, who called his own servants and handed over his property to
them. 15 And to one he gave five talents, to another
two, to another one, to each according to his own ability; and he
went on his journey. 16 At once he who had received
the five talents went and worked with them, and he gained another
five. 17 Likewise he who had the two gained another
two. 18 But he who received the one went away and dug
in the ground, and hid his master’s money. 19 Now
after a long time the master of those servants comes and settles
accounts with them. 20 And he who had received the
five talents came and brought another five talents, saying, ‘Sir,
you handed over to me five talents; look, I have gained five talents
more.’ 21 His master said to him, ‘Well done,
good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I
will appoint you over many things; enter the joy of your master.’
22 And he also who had the two talents said, ‘Sir,
you handed over to me two talents; look, I have gained two talents
more.’ 23 His master said to him, ‘Well done,
good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I
will appoint you over many things; enter the joy of your master.’
24 But he also who had received the one talent came
and said, ‘Sir, I knew that you are a hard man, reaping where you
did not sow and gathering where you did not scatter. 25 And
being afraid I went off and hid your talent in the ground; look, you
have your own.’ 26 But his master answered him,
saying, ‘You wicked and lazy servant, you knew that I reap where I
did not sow, and gather where I did not scatter. 27 You
ought therefore to have put my money with the bankers, and when I
came I would have received my own with interest. 28 Take
therefore the talent from him, and give it to him who has the ten
talents; 29 for to everyone who has will more be
given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even
what he has will be taken from him. 30 And throw the
unprofitable servant into the outer darkness; there will be wailing
and gnashing of teeth.’ ”
There are resemblances between this parable and that
narrated in Luke 19:11–27; indeed, some scholars see the two as
differing forms of the same parable. But the differences in the two
accounts are formidable; therefore it is better to see them as two
distinct parables, though with the same basic theme of servants
trading with their master’s money. But in Matthew the amounts are
large, while in Luke they are quite small; in this Gospel the amounts
vary from servant to servant, in that one they all receive the same
amount. Luke’s story brings in a reference to a man receiving a
kingdom and to the attitude of his subjects, whereas that in Matthew
concentrates on trading. The story in Luke teaches that all the
servants of God have one basic task, that of living out our faith;
this one starts with the fact of the different gifts to be found in
God’s servants and brings out the way they use (or do not use)
those gifts.
14. The story starts rather abruptly with “For
it is like” without any explanation of what it
signifies. But since the story follows on a parable explicitly said
to refer to “the kingdom of heaven” (v. 1), there is no reason
for doubting that it carries on the teaching about the kingdom
(GNB makes this explicit with “At that time the Kingdom of
heaven will be like—”). The preceding parable has taught the
importance of being ready; this one carries on that theme by showing
what readiness means.21 The kingdom, then, is likened to a
man going abroad. This man was obviously a man of means, and he
wanted to have his money used profitably while he was away. He
summoned his own servants23 and passed over to them
the money he wanted them to invest while he was away.
15. That the money was calculated in talents
presents us with a problem, for a talent was a measure of weight, not
a specific unity of currency. It was the largest weight in normal use
(see on 18:24), and when used for money it might refer to either gold
or silver or copper. Attempts to render the equivalent in modern
monetary terms run up against difficulties: we do not know exactly
what weight the talent was in Palestine in New Testament times, nor
do we know whether gold or silver or copper is in mind here, and, of
course, with inflation and the like modern currencies vary in worth.
All that we can say is that five talents26
represents a considerable sum of money, two was not a small
amount, and one was a sum not to be disregarded. The fact that
different amounts were allotted to different servants seems to mean
that the master thought one of them distinctly more able than the
others, the second one to be a man of some ability, and the third to
be distinctly less capable than the first two. No instructions are
recorded, and we are left to understand that the master wanted the
servants to use their own initiative. He wanted them to trade as best
they could with the money he had left with them, but he did not want
to tie them down with binding instructions when he could not tell
what conditions would be like throughout his absence. Having allotted
his money as he saw best, he went off.
16. There is a little problem related to the way
we should take at once. Since there is no punctuation in our
oldest MSS, it is possible to take it as the last word in verse 15
(as KJV, “and straightway took his journey”) or as the
first word in verse 16 (as most modern translations). The sense seems
to require this latter view; if we accept it, Jesus is saying that
the first servant immediately set to work. He does not say what that
servant did, and it is of no great importance. What matters is that
he worked28 with them. This signifies that
he put them to good use in some way. In time diligence was rewarded,
for the five talents entrusted to him became ten. His activity
resulted in the doubling of his original capital.
17. There is little to be said about the second
servant. He was also a diligent worker, and he likewise
doubled his original capital. He gained but two talents, but then his
base was narrower than that of his colleague who had gained five.
Both had done well; both had doubled the amount entrusted to them.
18. The third servant was a very different kind
of person (“a mouse-minded man,” Meier). The word But,
which introduces this section of the story, has adversative force;
this man forms a contrast to those mentioned earlier. Jesus says
nothing about his reasoning at this point, but simply that he hid the
money. Not for him the labor of buying and selling, working and
making a profit. He simply dug a hole and hid his master’s
money. This was a not uncommon way of hiding objects for
safekeeping in antiquity (cf. 13:44). If it was carefully done,
nobody other than the person who dug the hole would know where it was
and what was in it. Jesus does not indicate at this point why the man
did this (laziness? fear?). The important thing for this man was that
the money was secure and that he could produce it when the time came.
Keeping it in this way meant that there was no possibility of loss,
but it also meant that there was no possibility of gain.
19. The period of the master’s absence is not
specified, but it was a long time; it was this that enabled
the first two servants to increase their capital by 100 percent. The
master then comes and settles accounts with them
(the present tenses introduce a note of vividness). The day of
reckoning had come.
20. The first to give account of himself was the
first to have received the money. After the one sentence with the
vivid present tenses the past tenses are resumed. The man who had
been entrusted with five talents brought his original sum plus
the money he had gained and explained to his master that he had made
a gain of five talents. In both clauses he puts emphasis on
the amount: “Five talents you gave me; look, another five
talents I have gained.”
21. His master commended this servant. First he
says simply, “Well,” which we normally put into English with
“Well done,” but which could be taken in some such sense
as “It is well.” Or we could understand it as an interjection,
“Bravo!” (BDF 102[3]). However we take it, it is a mark of
approval. This is something the master understands and approves. He
goes on to salute the servant as good and faithful, an
expression that approves both his character and his diligence; he had
been all that the master expected (Cassirer translates, “excellent
and trustworthy servant”). The master goes on to develop the
thought of faithfulness. The servant, he says, has been faithful
over a few things. Clearly Jesus wants his hearers to understand
that the master was a very rich man. While we do not know exactly how
much five talents were worth in our money, it seems clear that it was
a considerable sum. But the master can speak of it as no more than a
few things. Now that the servant has proved himself in what the
master regards as a comparatively lowly piece of service, further
doors of opportunity will be opened to him. “I will appoint you
over many things” indicates that the faithful servant will be
rewarded with a position that will give him more scope for the use of
the abilities that he has shown he possesses. Once again Jesus is
teaching that the reward for good work is the opportunity of doing
further work. “Enter the joy of your master” may be
understood in the sense of REB, “share your master’s joy.”
Whether that is the way to take it or not, it clearly means that the
servant has received the warm approval of his master and that his
future is one in which joy will be prominent.
22–23. The process is repeated with almost
identical wording in the case of the servant who had been given two
talents. The man reports as his predecessor had reported with the
one change of two talents for “five talents,” and he
receives his commendation in exactly the same terms. It is noteworthy
that though he had gained but two talents, his praise is in
words identical with that given the man with five. They had both
doubled the sum entrusted to them, and they were both congratulated
for doing so. The actual size of their gain was not as important as
the fact that each had doubled the amount entrusted to him.
24. Finally there came also the man who
had received the one talent. He used the same polite
address as the other two, “Sir,” but diverges by going
into a description of his owner. He says, “I knew that you are a
hard man”; he puts this forward to excuse his failure to
do anything with his talent, but in doing so he takes away some of
his defense. If he knew that his master was a hard man, he
knew also that he had been expected to do something profitable with
the money entrusted to him. He explains something of what hardness
means in this case. “Reaping where you did not sow” means
that the master had the habit of enjoying a crop on which he had
expended no labor. “Gathering where you did not scatter”
probably has much the same meaning; it refers to the winnowing
process at the end of harvest (as it does in 3:12), plying the
winnowing shovel to scatter the mingled chaff and grain and thus
separate the two. The sowing and the scattering refer to the
processes that began and completed the getting of a crop. The master,
this man says, profited from sowing and winnowing where he had not
gone through the hard work of using the plough and plying the
winnowing shovel. The picture this servant draws is of a man with an
eye to business; he picked up profits in all sorts of places and not
only those that resulted from his own hard work.
25. All this is said to explain his reaction to
being left to look after a talent. He says that he was afraid,
evidently afraid that if he used the money in business undertakings
as his fellow servants were doing he would lose it and thus make
himself liable to punishment. So, he says, “I hid your talent in
the ground.” This made him certain of losing nothing, but it
also meant that when he was face to face with his master he could say
nothing better than “look, you have your own.”
26. But is adversative; far from accepting
the explanation, the master was about to rebuke his servant. He did
this, calling him both wicked and lazy. It was a wicked
thing to receive money from his master and fail to use it to the best
advantage, whatever his motive. But in any case, his motive was
something for which he could be blamed, and the master says that he
is lazy. He let a natural disinclination for work cooperate
with a dislike for getting some gain for his master, with the result
that he did nothing. He felt that his preservation of the talent was
something for which he should receive credit. He did not realize that
anyone with a talent must use it. The master accepts the description
of himself as reaping what he did not sow and gathering what he did
not winnow,40 but interestingly he drops the word “hard”
that the defaulter had applied to him. It may well be that he is not
saying that he really is the kind of man he has been said to be, but
saying that if the third servant really thought that he was like that
he would have acted in a different manner. What the servant had done
was not in accordance with a genuine belief that his master reaped
where he did not sow, gathered where he did not winnow.
27. The master points out how easily the servant
could have made some gain, even if he mistrusted his own ability to
trade profitably. “You ought” is a strong term; the master
is thinking of the easiest possible way of getting a profit, and at
the very least this is something that the man was under an obligation
to do. So he says that the servant should have put his money
with the bankers, a procedure that he could have undertaken
with safety and no great personal exertion. The result would have
been that his master44 would have profited from the
interest earned. As it was, he got his money back, but nothing
more.
28. Having rebuked his servant and made it clear
why he was being blamed, the master proceeds to the action required
in that situation. “Take therefore the talent from him,”
he says. Therefore is important. The master is not acting in
an arbitrary fashion. The man has had the money for quite some time
and has shown that he has no intention of making any use of it. Left
with him it would stay buried in the ground. But money should be
used, and therefore it was necessary to take the money away.
“Give it to him who has the ten talents,” he goes on. That
man has shown that he knows how to use money profitably. He will make
the best use of it, and therefore it should be left with him.
29. This verse largely repeats the words of 13:12
(where see the comments), and the small alterations make no
difference to the sense. Jesus is not countenancing business
practices that enable the wealthy to become wealthier at the expense
of the deserving poor. He is laying down a principle of the spiritual
life, a principle of great importance. Anyone who has a talent (using
the word in the modern sense) of any kind and fails to use it, by
that very fact forfeits it. By contrast, anyone who has a talent and
uses it to the full finds that that talent develops and grows. This
is a law of the spiritual life, and we neglect it at our peril. The
parable illustrates both possibilities. The servants who used what
they had saw it grow; the one who refused to use what he had lost it.
Jesus’ followers are warned.
- The servant who failed to use the talent entrusted to him is now characterized as unprofitable. He has had control of a full talent and has buried it. He has failed completely when he had the opportunity to do something useful.47 So he is consigned to the outer darkness, where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. With one exception, this expression combining the thoughts of punishment and of deep grief is found in Matthew only (see the note on 8:12). It stands for complete and final rejection and for unceasing sorrow and regret. We should bear in mind that this is not here pronounced over someone who has done some particularly heinous crime. It is the final result for the man who had only one talent and who steadfastly refused to use it.1
This parable
focuses primarily upon the useless servant. Gifts that are not used
are lost. The title “talents” is unfortunate, in that in our
language we use the word “talent” to refer to natural aptitudes
or abilities that people have. The talent in this story was a weight,
and its value depended on whether the object weighed was copper,
silver, or gold. In the story, talents were given to the several men
according to their “abilities” (v. 15). It would be best to
interpret the talents as opportunities. And in the parable each of
the men is given opportunity according to ability and is expected to
serve faithfully. This is a parable on responsibility.
There is a story that Archelaus went to Rome (4 b.c.) to
get his kingship over Judea confirmed. A party of fifty Jews went as
an embassy to Rome to resist the appointment, but did not succeed.
The revenge he inflicted upon the Jews after his return was not soon
forgotten. Such a story supplies emotional background for the weight
of this illustration. But in Jesus’ story, the issue is not revenge
but accountability. The gift and the responsibility were
commensurate. The men who had received five and two talents
respectively took risks; they applied themselves actively in their
responsibility. But the unfaithful servant thought only of himself
and his security, risked nothing, and achieved nothing.
On the Master’s return there is an accounting from
each. The two servants, representing faithful disciples, had
transformed privilege into action. The response of the Master carries
the note of eschatological joy; the “good and faithful”
servants enter the joy of their Master. But as soon as the
unfaithful servant opens his mouth, it is evident that he was not
interested in his Lord’s cause or advantage but rather in saving
his own skin. One who cannot venture his own person cannot take risks
for the sake of his Lord! He was judged according to his conduct.
What was given was taken away, “For whosoever shall save his life
shall lose it… .” The story closes with the language of
destruction in outer darkness—the symbol of the anguish of ultimate
separation.
As one of the Parousia
parables, this is a striking lesson on our responsibility.
A possible but simple outline follows: The Master (1) entrusted
responsibility to his servants; (2) increased responsibility for
faithfulness; (3) judged inexcusable irresponsibility. (See Rom. 2 on
God’s judgment.)2
The
Signs of Christ’s Coming—Part 9: The Tragedy of Wasted
Opportunity (Working Until Christ’s Return)
(25:14–30)
9
|
|
|
For it is just like a man about to go on a journey,
who called his own slaves, and entrusted his possessions to them. And
to one he gave five talents, to another, two, and to another, one,
each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey.
Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded
with them, and gained five more talents. In the same manner the one
who had received the two talents gained two more. But he who received
the one talent went away and dug in the ground, and hid his master’s
money. Now after a long time the master of those slaves came and
settled accounts with them. And the one who had received the five
talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, “Master, you
entrusted five talents to me; see, I have gained five more talents.”
His master said to him, “Well done, good and faithful slave; you
were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many
things, enter into the joy of your master.” The one also who had
received the two talents came up and said, “Master, you entrusted
to me two talents; see, I have gained two more talents.” His master
said to him, “Well done, good and faithful slave; you were faithful
with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter
into the joy of your master.” And the one also who had received the
one talent came up and said, “Master, I knew you to be a hard man,
reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no
seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the
ground; see, you have what is yours.” But his master answered and
said to him, “You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I
did not sow, and gather where I scattered no seed. Then you ought to
have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have
received my money back with interest. Therefore take away the talent
from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.” For to
everyone who has shall more be given, and he shall have an abundance;
but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be
taken away. And cast out the worthless slave into the outer darkness;
in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
(25:14–30)
In his poem Maud Muller, John Greenleaf Whittier
wrote the well-known lines, “For all sad words of tongue or pen,
the saddest are these: ‘It might have been!’ ”
Scripture is replete with admonitions to take advantage
of opportunity while it is available. Solomon wrote, “Cast your
bread on the surface of the waters, for you will find it after many
days,” and, “Sow your seed in the morning and do not be idle in
the evening, for you do not know whether morning or evening sowing
will succeed, or whether both of them alike will be good” (Eccles.
11:1, 6). That same man of wisdom wrote, “He who gathers in summer
is a son who acts wisely, but he who sleeps in harvest is a son who
acts shamefully” (Prov. 10:5). His father, David, had written, “As
for me, my prayer is to Thee, O Lord, at an acceptable time” (Ps.
69:13). Another psalmist wrote, “Come, let us worship and bow down;
let us kneel before the Lord our Maker. For He is our God, and we are
the people of His pasture, and the sheep of His hand. Today, if you
would hear His voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps. 95:6–8).
Isaiah exhorted, “Seek the Lord while He may be found;
call upon Him while He is near” (Isa. 55:6). Jeremiah reminded his
readers that “even the stork in the sky knows her seasons; and the
turtledove and the swift and the thrush observe the time of their
migration; but My people do not know the ordinance of the Lord”
(Jer. 8:7; cf. Heb. 3:7–8). Paraphrasing his preceding quotation
from Isaiah, Paul admonished the Corinthian believers, “Behold, now
is ‘the acceptable time,’ behold, now is ‘the day of salvation’
” (2 Cor. 6:2; cf. Isa. 49:8).
Jesus repeatedly called on men to make the most of
spiritual opportunities. “For a little while longer the light is
among you. Walk while you have the light, that darkness may not
overtake you; he who walks in the darkness does not know where he
goes. While you have the light, believe in the light, in order that
you may become sons of light” (John 12:35–36).
The tragedy of wasted opportunity is the theme of Jesus’
parable of the talents, the second of two parables relating to the
kingdom of heaven and, in particular, to men’s readiness for Jesus’
coming to establish the kingdom at His second coming (see Matt.
25:1). The parable of the virgins (vv. 1–13) focuses on readiness
manifested in waiting, whereas the parable of the talents focuses on
readiness manifested in working. The five virgins who had oil for
their lamps represent believers who possess saving grace; the two
faithful servants who invested their talents represent believers who
exhibit the serving life. Together the two parables depict the
balance of believers’ looking forward to His coming with
anticipation while living in preparedness for His coming through
faithful service.
Frequently, one or the other of those precepts either is
lost or overemphasized. Although believers are to rejoice continually
in the prospect of their Lord’s coming again, they are not to sit
back in idleness and do nothing. Saving faith is serving faith. On
the other hand, they are not to become so caught up in serving the
Lord that they forget to contemplate and rejoice in His return. It
was perhaps because they thought the Lord was coming momentarily that
some of the believers at Thessalonica fell into undisciplined,
careless living and decided to do no work at all. Consequently they
became busybodies who did nothing productive and even disrupted the
church. Paul rebuked them severely and commanded them “to work in
quiet fashion and eat their own bread.” He then admonished the
whole church not to “grow weary of doing good” (2 Thess.
3:10–13).
Peter challenged mockers who had the opposite problem.
They were so convinced that the Lord would not come soon that
they abandoned all moral restraint and lived in selfish profligacy (2
Pet. 3:3–4). Peter reminded them that the people of Noah’s day
responded in the same way to Noah’s prediction of the Flood, which
came upon them suddenly and at a time they did not expect. In the
same way, the apostle declared, Christ will appear suddenly in the
end time, bringing the “judgment and destruction of ungodly men”
(vv. 5–7).
It should be noted that, despite some resemblances, the
parable of the talents and the parable of the minas (Luke 19:11–27)
are not variations of the same story. The mina parable was given
several days earlier, and the two accounts have as many differences
as similarities.
Though the parable of the talents has relevance to every
generation, the Lord was still speaking directly about the generation
that will be living just before His return in glory (24:34), the
exact time of which will not be known in advance but the imminence of
which will be manifested by spectacular and unmistakable signs
(24:3–29).
The parable of the talents illustrates four basic
aspects of spiritual opportunity: the responsibility we receive, the
reaction we have, the reckoning we face, and the reward we gain.
The Responsibility We Receive
For
it is just like a man about to go on a journey, who called his own
slaves, and entrusted his possessions to them. And to one he gave
five talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to
his own ability; and he went on his journey. (25:14–15)
The antecedent of it is the kingdom of heaven
(see v. 1), of which this parable is another illustration. Some
translations add “the kingdom of heaven” to verse 14 in italics
to make the connection clear. Even the phrase it is appears in
italics in the nasb , being added because there is no main subject or
verb in the Greek text of this verse. Both subject and verb are
understood to continue over from verse 1, namely, “the kingdom of
heaven will be comparable to,” making it obvious that Jesus is
continuing to teach about the kingdom.
As frequently mentioned in this commentary series, it is
important to understand that in the New Testament the kingdom of
heaven and its synonymous phrase, the kingdom of God, refer to the
sphere of God’s dominion in Christ. But while maintaining that
basic meaning, the expression is used in two distinct ways. Sometimes
it designates the invisible body of all redeemed people. The Lord
used it in that sense when He declared, “Truly I say to you, unless
you are converted and become like children, you shall not enter the
kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 18:3; cf. 25:34). That is the kingdom in
its pure, exclusive sense.
But sometimes the kingdom of heaven refers to the
visible, outward body of those who profess to know and serve Christ.
Jesus made clear that in that outward manifestation of the kingdom
both the true and the false will be found, the genuine Christian and
the imitation (see section on Matt. 13).
It is in this visible, outward sense that Jesus refers
to the kingdom both in the parable of the virgins and in the parable
of the talents. The foolish virgins and the faithless slave do not
represent professed pagans, atheists, agnostics, or reprobates but
those who profess to belong to Christ. In each account, both genuine
and counterfeit believers are depicted.
The man who was about to go on a journey
obviously was planning to be gone for a long time, perhaps for many
months or even a year or more. In order for his estate to be well
managed in his absence, he called his own slaves, and entrusted
his possessions to them.
The fact that these were his own slaves
reinforces the idea that Jesus was illustrating the outward,
organizational church, composed of those who allege to belong to Him,
and not to mankind in general. Many people in the gospels are
referred to as Christ’s disciples although some of them proved to
be false. Such were the disciples who were offended at His teaching
about eating His flesh and drinking His blood (see John 6:52–66).
The traitor Judas not only is called a disciple but an apostle (Luke
6:13–16). Even those false followers, by virtue of being attached
outwardly to the church, have been entrusted with certain of the
Lord’s possessions.
Doulos, the singular of slaves, was a
general term that referred to any kind and level of bondservant. It
was used of common laborers and menial household servants as well as
of skilled craftsmen and artists and highly-trained professionals.
Their commonness was in being the personal property of their owners,
who often had the power of life and death over them.
A wealthy person would often have special slaves
who functioned as overseers of his household and managers of his
business. In many cases some of a man’s slaves were much better
educated and skilled than he was. Highly trusted slaves sometimes had
a virtual free hand within proscribed areas of responsibility even
when the owner was at home. When he left town for any length of time,
they acted almost in his full authority, having the equivalent of
what we now refer to as power of attorney They were responsible for
handling all the assets and business operations of their owner for
his benefit and profit.
The man in Jesus’ parable had three such trusted
slaves to whom he entrusted certain of his possessions
while he was away. To one he gave five talents, to another, two,
and to another, one, each according to his own ability. Satisfied
that his money was in capable hands, he then went on his
journey.
The numbers of talents given to the slaves have
no significance in themselves but simply illustrate a wide range of
responsibilities, from the very high and demanding to the relatively
low and easy It is significant, however, that the responsibilities
were given to each according to his own ability. The owner
knew his slaves intimately, and he entrusted each one only with the
responsibility he reasonably could be expected to handle.
Used in a context such as this, talents always
referred to money, but the word itself simply represented a measure
of weight. The value of a specific coin depended on its weight and
its composition. A talent of gold, for example, was extremely
valuable, a talent of silver less valuable, and a talent of copper or
bronze much less valuable still. But as with the number of talents
given to each man, the metal content of the coins, and therefore
their actual worth, is irrelevant to Jesus’ point. He was
emphasizing common accountability for differing levels of
responsibility based on individual ability.
Because the parable illustrates the kingdom of heaven,
the man in the story obviously represents Christ Himself, and
the going on a journey represents the time He is away from
earth between His first and His second advents. The slaves
depict professed believers, members of the Lord’s visible church
whom He has entrusted with various resources to use in His behalf
until He returns.
Jesus mentions only three levels of responsibility, but
those are suggestive of the extremely wide range of individual
abilities among people, who vary greatly in natural talent,
intellect, and other capabilities. They also vary greatly in
opportunity and privilege. Some church members have heard the gospel
and studied Scripture since early childhood, whereas others know only
the rudiments of the faith and have had little opportunity to learn
more. Those who are true believers are also given spiritual gifts
that vary widely from person to person (see Rom. 12:4–8; 1 Cor.
12:4–11). Some Christians are privileged to live and work closely
with others of like faith and are continually encouraged and
corrected by fellow believers. Other Christians, however, are the
only believers in their families or even in their community or town.
God knows intimately the abilities, gifts, opportunities, and
circumstances of every person, and He graciously assigns
responsibilities accordingly.
Even among the Twelve there were different levels of
responsibility. Peter, James, and John were clearly the inner circle,
and of that group Peter was the most prominent. From among the many
devoted believers in the church at Jerusalem, James soon became the
acknowledged leader, with commensurate responsibilities and
obligations. The implication of the parable of the talents is that,
even in the millennial kingdom and throughout eternity the redeemed
will continue to have different levels of responsibility.
The issue of the parable pertains to what each slave
does with the fairly assessed responsibility he has been given. The
noblest motive in the heart of a faithful servant would be to
accomplish as much as possible for the sake of his master during the
master’s absence. That was also the master’s desire: not equal
return from each of his slaves but relatively equal effort according
to ability.
It is significant that, although the slaves with the
five and the two talents did not produce equal profits, they produced
equal percentages of profit, doubling what they had been given. In
the same way, Christians with different capabilities and
opportunities may produce differing results while working with equal
faithfulness and devotion. The Lord therefore assures His servants
that “each will receive his own reward according to his own labor”
(1 Cor. 3:8).
The Reaction We Have
Immediately
the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them,
and gained five more talents. In the same manner the one who had
received the two talents gained two more. But he who received the one
talent went away and dug in the ground, and hid his master’s money.
(25:16–18)
The slave who had received the five talents was
eager to serve his master, and he therefore immediately … went
and traded with them, and gained five more talents. This man
represents the genuine believer whose supreme desire is to serve God,
fulfilling what Jesus declared to be the first and greatest
commandment, to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and
with all your soul and with all your might” (Deut. 6:5; cf. Matt.
22:37).
In this context, traded carries the broad
connotation of doing business over a period of time. The slave did
not simply make one good investment and then sit back, but rather
traded and retraded as long as his master was away. He may
have been involved in a number of commercial ventures, some of them
simultaneously. The point, however, is not in the particular type of
work he did but in the fact that he used to full advantage all the
resources his master had given him. His industry gained five more
talents for his master, doubling the amount with which he had
started.
In the same manner the one who had received the two
talents gained two more. Although the second slave was given less
than half as much to work with, he performed just as faithfully and
industriously as the first. Like his fellow slave, he doubled his
master’s money. Both men demonstrated supreme commitment to their
master by making the most of what they had, by maximizing their
opportunities.
The behavior of the third slave, however, was radically
different. He who received the one talent went away and dug in the
ground, and hid his master’s money. Hiding valuables in the
ground was a common practice in the ancient world, where there were
no bank vaults or safe deposit boxes. It was a simple and sensible
way to protect such things as jewels and coins (see Matt. 13:44).
But hiding working resources in the ground was hardly a
sensible way to carry on a business and earn a profit. The slave had
not received the one talent to protect it but to use it wisely
for his master’s profit. Although he had been given fewer resources
than the other two slaves, he had the same obligation to use what he
had to his maximum ability.
The Reckoning We Face
Now
after a long time the master of those slaves came and settled
accounts with them. And the one who had received the five talents
came up and brought five more talents, saying, “Master, you
entrusted five talents to me; see, I have gained five more talents.”
His master said to him, “Well done, good and faithful slave; you
were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many
things, enter into the joy of your master.” The one also who had
received the two talents came up and said, “Master, you entrusted
to me two talents; see, I have gained two more talents.” His master
said to him, “Well done, good and faithful slave; you were faithful
with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter
into the joy of your master.” And the one also who had received the
one talent came up and said, “Master, I knew you to be a hard man,
reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no
seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the
ground; see, you have what is yours.” But his master answered and
said to him, “You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I
did not sow, and gather where I scattered no seed. Then you ought to
have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have
received my money back with interest. (25:19–27)
The exact length of time the owner was gone is not
mentioned and is irrelevant, except that it was a long time.
In the context of the Olivet discourse, in which Jesus repeatedly
states that His second coming will be at a time when He is not
expected (see 24:36, 42, 44, 50; 25:13), the implication is that the
master of those slaves came back unexpectedly.
The first order of business upon his return was to
determine what the slaves had done with his assets, and he therefore
sat down and settled accounts with them.
In this discourse Jesus was addressing those who would
be alive at the time of His return (24:34), and the statement in the
parable that the master was gone a long time (cf. 25:5)
suggests that He was indirectly telling the Twelve that His coming
back would not be as soon as they anticipated (see Luke 19:11). He
did not tell them that it would not be in their lifetimes, because
that would have tended to decrease their motivation for diligence.
The idea was that, whether He would be gone for a seemingly long or
seemingly short time by their human reckoning, they would have
opportunity to serve Him and were obligated to be about His work.
Some years ago, certain segments of evangelicalism
became preoccupied with Christ’s return, and some church members
quit their jobs or sold their businesses and began watching for His
appearance. One man I knew sold everything he had for about half a
million dollars, some of which he used to buy thousands of New
Testaments and distribute them around the world. He also bought and
distributed various religious ornaments and trinkets he thought would
arouse people’s interest in Christ. But soon he was bankrupt as
well as frustrated and disheartened that his confidence in the Lord’s
immediate return proved unfounded.
When the master called his servants together to settle
the accounts, the first one reported, Master, you entrusted five
talents to me; see, I have gained five more talents. The man was
not boasting but simply relating the truth of the matter. There is no
hint of pride or self-congratulation. He knew that everything he
started with had been entrusted to him by his master,
and that he had only done what he should have done. He exhibited the
attitude Jesus said every obedient disciple should have: “When you
do all the things which are commanded you, say, ‘We are unworthy
slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done’ ”
(Luke 17:10).
Near the end of his life, Paul wrote Timothy, “I am
already poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure
has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I
have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown
of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to
me on that day” (2 Tim. 4:6–8). He was not boasting but simply
expressing a deep sense of fulfillment and rejoicing. He was
confident the Lord knew the integrity of his heart and would be
faithful to reward Him according to His gracious promises.
When the master said to him, “Well done, good and
faithful slave,” he was commending the slave’s attitude more
than just his accomplishment. He first of all commended the man’s
excellent character, which expressed itself in excellent service.
Because the master represents the Lord Himself
when He returns in glory and power to establish His kingdom, it is
remarkable to contemplate that the holy, just, perfect Lord of the
universe will deign to praise His true disciples for their
faithfulness, imperfect as it will have been. Yet that is the
glorious prospect of every child of God who, like Paul, loves
Christ’s appearing (2 Tim. 4:8).
The master not only highly praised his servant
but highly rewarded him, declaring, “You were faithful with a
few things, I will put you in charge of many things.”
Not only will the Lord entrust greater earthly tasks to
those who prove themselves faithful, but their heavenly reward will
be opportunity for greater service to Him throughout eternity.
Christ’s faithful servants living on earth when He returns will
enter into the millennial kingdom in their same earthly bodies and
will be given responsibilities commensurate with their previous
faithfulness. Believers who have died or been raptured will come to
earth with the Lord in their glorified bodies, and they, too, will be
given rulership in proportion to their faithfulness to God while they
lived on earth. Both in the millennial and the eternal manifestations
of the kingdom, those who have been faithful on earth will be put
… in charge of many things much greater in significance than
the few things over which they previously were faithful
stewards.
Of the many things heaven will be, it will not be
boring. Our heavenly perfection, for example, will not be a matter
simply of never making a mistake. Nor will it be always making a hole
in one or a home run, as it were. Rather it will be a time of
ever-expanding and increasingly joyous service, and the saints who
then will serve the most and rejoice the most will be those who have
served the Lord most steadfastly while on earth. Every soul in heaven
will equally possess eternal life and will be equally righteous,
equally Christlike, and equally glorious. Everyone will be equally
perfect, because perfection has no degrees. The difference will be in
opportunities and levels of service. Just as the angels serve God in
ranks, so will redeemed men and women, and the degree of their
heavenly service will have been determined by the devotedness of
their earthly service.
Heaven will not involve differing qualities of service,
because everything heavenly is perfect. Everything done for the Lord
will be perfectly right and perfectly satisfying. There will be no
distinctions of superiority or inferiority, and there will be no
envy, jealousy, or any other remnant of sinful human nature. Whatever
one’s rank or responsibility or opportunity, those will be God’s
perfect will for that individual and therefore will be perfectly
enjoyed. In a way that is beyond our present comprehension, believers
will be both equal and unequal in the Millennium and in the eternal
state.
In the parable of the pounds, the nobleman who was going
into a far country to receive a kingdom gave ten of his servants one
mina each to do business with until he returned. When the nobleman
came back, the servant who had multiplied his mina tenfold was
rewarded with authority over ten cities and the one who had
multiplied his mina fivefold was given authority over five cities
(Luke 19:12–19). In that parable it is even more explicit that
Jesus was speaking of millennial and eternal rewards, because they
are specifically bestowed after the nobleman’s kingdom was
established. And as in the parable of the talents, the kingdom
rewards are given in proportion to earthly faithfulness.
Jesus also mentions a second reward the master gives to
the faithful slave: enter into the joy of your master. Not
only will believers be rewarded in heaven with still greater
opportunity for service, but they will even share the divine joy
of their master. In addition to sharing the Lord’s
divine sinlessness and holiness they will also share His divine joy.
Imagine the consummate ecstasy believers will have when
they fully comprehend the significance of having their sins forever
abolished and their righteousness forever established! It was the
joyful prospect of providing that gracious redemption that motivated
Christ to endure the cross and despise its shame (Heb. 12:2).
The second slave made the same report as the first, the
only difference being that he had doubled two talents instead
of five, and therefore gained two talents more. The master’s
response to the second slave was also identical: “Well done,
good and faithful slave; you were faithful with a few things, I will
put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.”
The third slave, however, did not present the master
with earnings but with an accusatory and self-serving excuse. Having
done nothing with what he had been given, he said, “Master, I
knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and
gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went
away and hid your talent in the ground; see, you have what is yours.”
Like the other two, that slave was identified as
belonging to the master (see v. 14), representative of his belonging
to Christ’s church before the second coming. But in two distinct
ways he proved that his identification with Christ was superficial
and did not involve genuine faith or regeneration.
First of all, he produced absolutely nothing with the
talent he had been given and did not even make an attempt to use it
for his master’s benefit and profit.
As already mentioned, this slave does not represent an
atheist or even an agnostic, because he recognized the master as his
legitimate owner and no doubt made a pretense of honoring the master
while he was away. He did not misuse his talent on immoral and
selfish pursuits like the prodigal son or embezzle it like the
unmerciful servant of Matthew 18. He simply disregarded the
stewardship he had been given.
In much the same way, unbelieving church members live in
the environment of God’s redeemed community and enjoy exposure to
the teaching of His word and the fellowship of His people. But in
spite of their spiritual privilege, they make no positive response to
the gospel and therefore can render no fruitful service.
Second, this slave demonstrated his counterfeit
allegiance by deprecating his master’s character, accusing him of a
hard man, reaping where he did not sow, and gathering
where he had scattered no seed. He charged his owner with
unmerciful and dishonest.
That slave represents the professing Christian whose
limited knowledge of God leads him to conclude that He is distant,
uncaring, unjust, and undependable. Instead of judging themselves in
light of God’s inerrant Word, such people judge God in the light of
their own perverted perceptions. They not only justify themselves but
do so at God’s expense.
His erroneous estimation of his master’s character was
sufficient proof that this slave had no intimate or reliable
knowledge of him. That slave portrays the unregenerate church member
who has no spiritual fruit in his life and no spiritual worship in
his heart. He is blind to the Lord’s kindness, grace, compassion,
mercy, honor, majesty, and glory because he has never surrendered
himself to the Lord’s sovereignty and grace.
Everything about that man contradicted his professed
commitment to his master. In a certain way he was afraid of
his master, but it was not the fear of reverential awe but of
irreverent contempt. As his own words testified, he resented and
despised the master and had no love or respect for him at all. His
relationship to the master was one of enmity rather than peace, of
hatred rather than love, of rejection rather than faith.
This slave represents a professed Christian whose view
of God is corrupt because his unredeemed heart is still corrupt. He
views God through the lens of his own depraved convictions.
In response to the unfaithful slave’s rationalization,
the master said, “You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap
where I did not sow, and gather where I scattered no seed. Then you
ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would
have received my money back with interest.”
The slave was wicked in that he unjustly
besmirched the character of his master, and he was lazy in
that he did nothing with the talent entrusted to him. By repeating
the slave’s charge against him, the master did not acknowledge its
truthfulness. He rather said, in effect: “You think I am a hard
man, do you, harvesting crops that do not belong to me? If you really
thought that, why did you not take the talent and put it in the bank,
where it could at least draw interest?”
The ancient Roman Empire had a banking system that was
in many respects like those of modern times. The maximum loan rate
was 12 percent simple interest, and the interest earned on deposits
was probably about half that rate. The slave with the one talent
therefore could have reaped at least a 6 percent return by making
virtually no effort at all. The fact that he did not attempt even to
earn simple interest on the money confirmed his total
irresponsibility and his indifference to the master.
Even if the slave’s accusation against his owner had
been valid, it would not have excused his indolence. If anything, it
would have made it more foolhardy. “If you thought I demand a
return even on that which does not belong to me,” the master
countered, in effect, “did you think I would not require a return
on that which does belong to me?” The slave was verbally
hanged with his own rope.
The truth of the matter was that the slave had no real
concern for his master one way or the other, and his excuse seems to
have been more spur of the moment than planned. He did not expect the
master’s return and did not expect to be held accountable, and when
he was caught by surprise he simply threw out an outrageous charge
that made no sense.
The distinguishing mark of the first two servants was
that they used their opportunity to serve the Lord before His return,
which they eagerly awaited, and thereby proved the genuineness of
their salvation. They were willing to invest everything they had in
the service of their Master. The third servant, on the other hand,
put aside what God had given him and went about his own selfish
business. He called himself a servant of God but demonstrated
conclusively he was not.
The master was angry with the third slave not simply
because he lost a profit but because the slave wasted his
opportunity. Jesus’ point was that having little to work with is no
excuse for not using it at all. Even a person with limited exposure
to Scripture and who possesses few talents and has few opportunities
for service is fully obligated to use those blessings in God’s
service.
In T. S. Eliot’s play Murder in the Cathedral,
the chorus chants, “Yet we have gone on living, living and partly
living” Those words are reminiscent of the three slaves in this
parable. Two of them were truly alive, whereas the other had only the
appearance of life. Two of them built their houses on a foundation of
rock, the other built his on sand. Two of them were wheat, the other
was a tare.
The profit earned by the first two servants represents
the accomplishment and satisfaction of a life that belongs to the
Lord and is faithfully dedicated to His service. The failure of the
third servant to use that with which he had been entrusted by his
master represents the emptiness, uselessness, and worthlessness of a
life in which profession of faith in Christ is proved false and
meaningless by the careless waste of privilege and opportunity.
The Reward We Gain
Therefore
take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten
talents. “For to everyone who has shall more be given, and he shall
have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he
does have shall be taken away. And cast out the worthless slave into
the outer darkness; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing
of teeth. (25:28–30)
Jesus made clear that the visible church will always
include both genuine and spurious Christians. Every church has tares
that, except to God, are indistinguishable from the wheat. Their true
character cannot be determined by what they do outwardly, because
unbelievers can be quite active in the church and seemingly
interested in its work. As far as the Lord is concerned, however, the
work they do is not in His service or for the benefit of His kingdom.
Whatever such a person may do with the abilities he has from the
Lord, they are spiritually unproductive and might as well be hidden
away. In the kingdom of God, the realm of His sovereign rule-whether
in the visible earthly church or in the millennial kingdom-there will
be no acceptable service offered to Him except that offered by true
believers.
Therefore when Christ returns, He will figuratively take
away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten
talents. As He had declared on at least one previous occasion
(see Matt. 13:12), Jesus now said again: “To everyone who has
shall more be given, and he shall have an abundance; but the one who
does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.”
Those who demonstrate by their spiritual fruitfulness
that they belong to God will be given even greater opportunity to
bear fruit for Him. But those who demonstrate by their
unproductiveness that they do not belong to God will lose even the
benefits the once had. Such a person does not have any true
blessings from God because he has made them worthless through disuse.
But the reality of what those blessings could have been will be given
to someone who has proved his genuineness. The divine principle is
that those who trust in Christ will gain everything, and those who do
not trust in Him will lose everything.
The third slave was not simply unfaithful but faithless.
A true Christian who wastes his abilities, spiritual gifts, and
opportunities will have his work “burned up, [and] he shall suffer
loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire” (1
Cor. 3:15). The person represented by this slave, however, has no
faith at all and therefore no saving relationship to God. No matter
how much he may appear to have been blessed by God and to have served
Him, one day he will hear from the Lord’s own lips the devastating
words, “l never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice
lawlessness” (Matt. 7:23).
The third slave was utterly worthless, and his
fate was to be cast out … into the outer darkness; in that place
there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Just like the man
who tried to crash the king’s wedding feast without the proper
garment (Matt. 22:11–13), this unproductive, counterfeit servant
was destined for destruction.
Outer darkness is a common New Testament
description of hell. “God is light,” John declared, “and in Him
there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). Light signifies God’s
presence, and darkness signifies his absence. Hell not only is
eternal darkness but eternal torment. In that place there shall be
weeping and gnashing of teeth, signifying the unrelieved agony of
separated from God’s presence and goodness.
Profitable and unprofitable servants (vv. 14–30).
This parable must not be confused with the Parable of the Pounds
(Luke 19:11–27) though the two parables do have similarities.
Please note that each servant in this parable was given money (a
talent was worth about twenty years’ wages) according to his
ability. The man with much ability was given five talents; the man
with average ability received two talents; the man with minimal
ability received one talent.
The talents represent opportunities to use our
abilities. If five talents were given to a person with minimal
ability, he would be destroyed by the heavy responsibility. But if
only one talent were given to a man of great ability, he would be
disgraced and degraded. God assigns work and opportunity according to
ability. We are living in the period of time between Matthew 25:18
and 19. We have been assigned our ministries according to the
abilities and gifts God has given us. It is our privilege to serve
the Lord and multiply His goods.
The three servants fell into two categories: faithful
and unfaithful. The faithful servants took their talents and put them
to work for their Lord. The unfaithful servant hid his talent in the
earth. Instead of using his opportunities, he buried them! He did not
purposely do evil. But by doing nothing, he was committing sin and
robbing his Lord of service and increase.
The two men who put their money to work each received
the same commendation (Matt. 25:21, 23). It was not the portion
but the proportion that made the difference. They started as
servants, but their Lord promoted them to rulers. They were faithful
with a few things, so the Lord trusted them with many things. They
had worked and toiled, and now they entered into joy. Their
faithfulness gave each of them a capacity for greater service and
responsibility.
The third servant was unfaithful and therefore was
unrewarded. Because this man was afraid he might fail, he never tried
to succeed. He feared life and his responsibilities. This paralyzed
him with anxiety, so he buried the talent to protect it. The least he
could have done was put the money in a bank and collect some
interest. There was no real risk in that.
What we do not use for the Lord, we are in danger of
losing. The master reprimanded the unfaithful, unprofitable servant,
and then took his talent from him. The man with the most talents
received the extra talent.
Some feel that this unprofitable servant was not a true
believer. But it seems that he was a true servant, even though
he proved to be unprofitable. The “outer darkness” of Matthew
25:30 need not refer to hell, even though that is often the case in
the Gospels (Matt. 8:12; 22:13). It is dangerous to build theology on
parables, for parables illustrate truth in vivid ways. The man was
dealt with by the Lord, he lost his opportunity for service, and he
gained no praise or reward. To me, that is outer darkness.
It is possible that the one-talent man thought that his
one talent was not really very important. He did not have five
talents, or even two. Why worry about one? Because he was
appointed as a steward by the Lord. Were it not for the
one-talent people in our world, very little would get accomplished.
His one talent could have increased to two and brought glory to his
master.
These three parables encourage us to love His appearing,
look for His appearing, and labor faithfully until He comes. We
should be watching, witnessing, and working. We may not be successful
in the eyes of men, or even popular with others. But if we are
faithful and profitable, we shall receive our reward.3
(6). The Parable of the Talents. 25:14–30
14–23. The Parable of the Talents further
emphasizes the need for personal preparation and faithful service to
the Master (see also Lk 19:11–28). The talents represent
monetary values and are distributed according to ability (vs.
15). Far country indicating the time between Jesus’ first
coming and His final return during which He is in heaven. The three
servants are typical of three types who are entrusted various
tasks in accordance with their own ability. Not all are expected to
produce the same results, but all are to be faithful with what they
have had entrusted to them. Thus, the first two double their money,
while the last one hides the one … in the earth. The phrase
After a long time gives a veiled indication of the length of
Christ’s departure to heaven during the present age. Each of those
producing results is commended by the Master: Well done … good
and faithful servant and is promised to be a ruler over many
things, with a view to continued service in the millennial
kingdom.
24–25. The great mistake of the unfaithful
servant was in misjudging the character of his Master: thou art a
hard man. He could not have known the Master well to assume him
to be severe and merciless. Atkinson (p. 801) observes, “The slave
seems to have thought that whatever he did his master would be unjust
to him.” He failed to understand the real generosity of his Master
who wanted him to experience the joys of service. Whereas the Parable
of the Ten Virgins emphasized personal preparation for the coming of
Christ, the Parable of the Talents stresses the importance of
faithful service during His present absence.
26–30. The fact that the latter man is called
wicked and slothful and an unprofitable servant (vs.
30) who is cast out into outer darkness, certainly indicates
that he was not a true disciple of the Master. The idea of this
illustrative parable is that all true believers will produce results
(elsewhere, “fruits”) in varying degrees. Those who produce no
results are not truly converted. Those who deny soul-winning,
personal evangelism, and church growth will find no comfort in this
story. Those who hide their treasure (probably, the life-changing
message of the gospel), because of a harsh view of the Master’s
sovereignty over them, reveal that they do not really love people
and, therefore, their own salvation is questionable!4
115
THE PARABLE OF THE TALENTS
Matthew 25:14–30
Right after the parable of the wise
and foolish virgins, by which Jesus instructed His disciples to be
prepared for His coming, He told them the parable of the talents to
teach them to be diligent as they waited for Him. As we have seen
time and time again in the Olivet Discourse, this same lesson applies
to us, Jesus’ disciples in the twenty-first century. Sadly, the
basic principles found in this parable fly in the face of everything
we hear in contemporary culture. If ever Jesus told a parable that is
politically incorrect in contemporary America, it is this one. We
need to close our ears to the siren voices of the pagan culture in
which we live, and listen carefully to the teaching of our Lord and
Savior.
According to Matthew, Jesus told His disciples: “For
the kingdom of heaven is like a man traveling to a far country, who
called his own servants and delivered his goods to them. And to one
he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one, to each
according to his own ability; and immediately he went on a journey.
Then he who had received the five talents went and traded with them,
and made another five talents. And likewise he who had received two
gained two more also. But he who had received one went and dug in the
ground, and hid his lord’s money” (vv. 14–18).
Jesus told a story about a wealthy man who went away for
a long journey, and before he went he entrusted some of his riches to
three of his servants, giving each of them “talents.” These
talents were not abilities but units of weight. In the ancient world,
a talent could be a unit of gold, silver, or bronze. Jesus did not
say which kind of precious metal the master entrusted to his
servants, but a talent of gold or silver was quite valuable.
The master gave five talents to one servant, two talents
to another, and one to a third. He distributed these talents
according to his estimation of the ability of each servant to handle
them. This is why he did not distribute them equally. Then, after the
master’s departure, the man to whom the master gave five talents
doubled that number. Likewise, the man to whom the master gave two
talents also produced a hundred percent increase. The third servant,
however, was concerned that he might lose the one talent he had been
given and land in serious trouble with his master, so he played it
safe and buried his master’s gold or silver in the ground.
Stewardship Capitalism
On the surface, the interpretation of this parable is
about as simple as it gets. It focuses on the productivity of the
Lord’s people, on fruitfulness. That is, Jesus was telling the
disciples to engage in productive activity until His return.
What we find initially in this rather simple parable is
a lesson about stewardship. A steward was a servant in the ancient
world who was given authority to make sure everything functioned
properly in the master’s household. The Greek word that is
translated as “stewardship” in the New Testament is oikonomia;
we get the English word economy from it. The word oikonomia
is a combination of two other words: oikos, which means
“house,” and nomos, which means “law.” So, stewardship
has to do with the law of the house or the rule of the house—how
matters in the house are handled.
However, I think this parable points beyond stewardship
to something else. It will be politically incorrect for me to write
this, but I believe Jesus was speaking here not just about
stewardship but about a particular kind of stewardship, which I call
“stewardship capitalism.” The term capitalism has become a
dirty word in Western culture. Of course, capitalism can take all
kinds of shapes and faces, and at times it can be ruthless and
greedy. But the Bible presents a picture of stewardship capitalism
and gives basic principles that are extremely important.
The first of these principles is that we possess
nothing. Everything we think we own is really God’s, for He owns
everything, and all that we have we hold as stewards for Him. Second,
God gives us capital not to waste, to horde, or to bury in the
ground, but to be productive. If we put our capital to work, it can
earn while we sleep. Third, stewardship capitalism includes the
principle of delayed gratification. When we receive our paychecks, we
do not spend everything we have earned to gratify every desire we
have. Instead, we put the brakes on our consumption and invest a
portion of what we take home for the future.
I saw the benefits of delayed gratification as I was
growing up in Pittsburgh, the largest steel manufacturing city in the
world. Pittsburgh and all the towns around it were marked by the
billowing smoke from the steel mills of Western Pennsylvania. Sadly,
on Friday afternoons, when the whistles would blow at the mills, the
men would go to the paymaster’s office and get their money, and
then most of them would head to the nearest bars. Only about one out
of ten would go home and give his wife his pay so she could deposit
it in the bank. Guess which of those workers sent their sons to
college? The sons of those men who delayed their gratification and
invested in the futures of their children became doctors, lawyers,
and engineers.
The Bible is also very concerned about the material
well-being of human beings. It is not a Gnostic book that is
concerned only with our souls. Our Lord Jesus was profoundly
concerned that people should have enough to eat, that they should not
be naked, that they should have homes. All of these things cost
money. My father-in-law used to say he would rather clothe me than
feed me. He said I was eating him out of house and home when I came
around to date his daughter. But God is concerned about all human
needs.
So, what is the single most important factor for the
material well-being of people? The answer to that question is
simple—production. Unless food is produced, people starve. Unless
clothing is produced, people freeze. Unless houses are built, people
are without shelter. So, the most important factor in improving the
welfare of human beings is to increase productivity. On an individual
basis, it is extremely important that we be productive.
What is the most important factor for increasing
productivity? The answer is very simple: tools. Let me give you a
simple example. You probably have a lawn outside your home. Having
that lawn requires you to balance three factors—labor, time, and
money. Your grass needs to be cut. What is the cheapest way to cut
it? You could go out, kneel down, and start chewing off each blade of
grass one at a time. You probably would never get it done. It would
be extremely labor-intensive. However, it would be cheap—so long as
you did not need to spend time doing something else to earn money.
You can increase your productivity by using a pair of scissors
instead of our teeth. It would be a little more expensive to use
scissors rather than your teeth, and it still would be
labor-intensive, but it would be a little bit more efficient. You can
increase your productivity even more by buying a push mower. That
would save time, but it would cost more money. If you want to save
more time and labor, you can buy a power mower. It will cost you more
money, but it will certainly save you time and labor because you will
have a better tool. The better the tools, the more productive you can
be.
In 1989, right after the fall of Nicolae Ceausescu, I
had the privilege of visiting Romania. As we traveled across the
landscape by train, I could see thousands of babushkas,
“grandmothers,” wearing black dresses down to their ankles, out
in the fields with wooden hoes and wooden rakes, loading their
produce on ox-drawn or donkey-drawn carts. It was very primitive and
unproductive agriculture. Why could the Romanian farmers not produce
as much as American farmers? Was it because the Romanian men were not
as strong physically as American men? No. Was it because they were
not as smart? No. Was it because they did not have specific knowledge
of agriculture? No, all the best methods for growing things was
available in their language. The one thing the Romanian farmers did
not have that American farmers had was tools. They did not have
tractors and mechanical harvesters. That was the reason American
farmers could produce a thousand times more in a month than Romanian
farmers. It all came down to tools.
What is the single most important factor for acquiring
tools? The answer is a really unpopular word—profit. In order to
buy tools, you must have surplus capital. If you do not have the
surplus capital, you must use wooden hoes and rakes. Profit is simply
what is left over from your revenue after you pay your expenses.
Somehow we have come to hate the idea of profit. But if you do not
have profit, you will not have tools. And if you do not have tools,
you will not have production. And if you do not have production, you
will not have a shirt on your back, a loaf of bread to eat, or a
house to live in.
So, Jesus wants His people to be productive with the
things God has given to them. In other words, He wants us to use
those things fruitfully, so that they increase.
Good Servants and a Lazy Servant
Jesus then related what happened when the master
returned: “After a long time the lord of those servants came and
settled accounts with them. So he who had received five talents came
and brought five other talents, saying, ‘Lord, you delivered to me
five talents; look, I have gained five more talents besides them.’
His lord said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you
were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many
things. Enter into the joy of your lord.’ He also who had received
two talents came and said, ‘Lord, you delivered to me two talents;
look, I have gained two more talents besides them.’ His lord said
to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been
faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things.
Enter into the joy of your lord’ ” (vv. 19–23). When
the master learned how productive the first two servants had been, he
said: “Well done. You’re a good servant, a faithful servant.
Since you’ve been faithful in little, I’m going to make you
responsible for more and more things.” He gave the same message to
the man who doubled the two talents. He was given fewer talents, but
he was just as productive with them.
What of the third servant, the man who was given one
talent? Jesus said: “Then he who had received the one talent
came and said, ‘Lord, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where
you have not sown, and gathering where you have not scattered seed.
And I was afraid, and went and hid your talent in the ground. Look,
there you have what is yours’ ” (vv. 24–25). This man
came not with a report of productivity but with excuses. He said:
“Lord, I knew you were a hard man. You’re the kind of man who
reaps where you haven’t sown.” What kind of man was the servant
talking about? He was describing a capitalist, one who buys a field
and hires other people to sow the seed and reap the harvest. They get
a salary but the master gets the largest portion of the profit
because his capital was working for him.
That excuse did not curry the master’s favor. Jesus
told His disciples: “But his lord answered and said to him, ‘You
wicked and lazy servant, you knew that I reap where I have not sown,
and gather where I have not scattered seed. So you ought to have
deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have
received back my own with interest. Therefore take the talent from
him, an5
*
1
Morris, L. (1992). The
Gospel according to Matthew (pp. 626–632).
Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity
Press.
3
Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The
Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, p. 92).
Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
4
Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M. (Eds.). (1994). KJV
Bible Commentary (pp. 1950–1951). Nashville:
Thomas Nelson.
No comments:
Post a Comment