Lectionary Bible Studies and Sermons


Matthew

The parable of the Wedding Feast. 22:1-14

[Seed logo] Introduction
      In the parable of the Wedding Feast we are again confronted by a particular type of parable known as a kingdom parable. Most of Jesus' parables are illustrations, stories that teach a truth, whereas the kingdom parables are riddles, hidden mysteries; they proclaim the gospel in a hidden way. The kingdom parables announce that the kingdom of God is at hand, but the message is muffled, and this because the hearers have already rejected the gospel. As such, the kingdom parables are signs of God's judgment, in fact, they often proclaim judgment. The dawning of Christ's reign is good news for those who accept it, but bad news for those who don't. In the parable of the Wedding Feast we are reminded that the "marriage of the lamb", the reign of the messiah, is at hand. The final invitations are out and the messiah is even now sorting out those who are worthy to attend. When Jesus openly proclaimed the gospel, he would end his message with "repent and believe the gospel." Now is the moment of decision, so if we want to be worthy to attend, then now is the time to repent and believe.

The passage
      v1. Jesus again communicates with his audience by speaking in riddles. His hearers, particularly the Jewish authorities, no longer deserve a clear word from God.
      v2. The parable concerns the dawning of God's reign in his messiah, and makes the point that this may be compared to the situation where a king puts on a wedding feast for his son.
      v3-10. The first part of the parable describes the wedding preparations now completed and the call sent out to the invited guests. Twice the call goes out, but the guests refuse. "They completely disregarded the invitation", even treated the kings servants disgracefully. Of course, the king is enraged and sends troops to deal with the guests and then sends his servants down to the marketplace to invite everyone and anyone to the banquet.
      It's very easy to allegorize, to spiritualize, the different elements in this story. The wedding feast becomes the heavenly celebration of God's elect, the servants become missionaries, prophets, even Jesus. Yet, this is not the way we are to treat kingdom parables. They make one point, "the kingdom of God is at hand", Christ's reign has begun. The day is now and the invitation is out there, so a "I cannot come" response is less than wise.
      v11-13. The parable goes on to describe the typical sorting-out scenario that goes with the establishment of God's reign in Christ. The "not worthy" are out in the cold, and "there was nothing he could say." The wailing and raging serves to describe the condemned, as apposed to the approved, who face no more weeping or mourning. So, how do we get approved? Repent and believe.
      Again, the possibilities for spiritualizing this story are endless. The pietist argues that the wedding robe is obedience, etc., while the quietist argues that it is forgiveness, etc., with numerous possibilities in between.
      v14. This pithy saying serves to round off the parable. It compares the remnant of those approved and therefore, God's elect, "the chosen ones", with the totality of those invited.

Is our wedding robe approved?
      Most Christians have a problem with assurance. In simple terms, we are not sure of our salvation. There is this constant fear that when the roll gets called up yonder we may not be there, or if we're there, we may not get to stay there. Will we get to hear "well done thou good and faithful servant"?
      A parable like the Wedding Feast and the way it gets handled by most preachers, is often the source of the problem. I have indelibly marked on my mind the sense of despair I felt as a young person facing the prospect of my wedding garment not being worthy of the heavenly celebrations. Like the apostle, my righteous has always been filthy rags, in fact, increasingly so as I have grown older. Then, of course, my reading reinforced my fear. It probably all depends on what Christian literature we read, and in my case it has tended to be of a conservative nature. So, I took in the words of the great ones, men like F.F. Bruce, one of my heros, who said of this parable, and particularly the piece on the wedding garment, that it was "a suitable pendant to any parable of grace, as showing that, while the door of the kingdom is open to all, personal holiness cannot be dispensed with."
      My personal holiness is a rather tattered cloak indeed. So, is my end the outer darkness?
      One way through the problem is to get into a bit of reinterpretation. In the ancient church a person's worthiness was determined by their wedding robe having been washed by the blood of Christ, and later, by pushing a sacramental view where the robe becomes a baptismal robe. There are plenty today who suggest that Jesus actually provides the robe and all we have to do is put it on. The wedding robe is his forgiveness or his righteousness. My assurance might have been a bit stronger if my ministers had gone down at least one of these roads, for at least the sentiment was right.
      So then, by what means are we approved in the sight of God, and let me add, eternally approved? There is only one way to get into the wedding feast and not find ourselves thrown out, and that is by simply turning to Jesus (repent) and trusting him for our salvation (believe). How simple is that!

Discussion
      1. What is the particular function of a kingdom parable?
      2. What message does the parable of the Wedding Feast convey?
      3. On what grounds can a believer be sure of their salvation?


Notes

Textual notes   Abbreviations,   Bibliography
 

      The parable of the Wedding Feast is often treated as the third of a trilogy of parables directed at the Jewish leadership, although this, unlike the others, 21:28-32 and 21:33-44, is a kingdom parable, ie. the gospel in a riddle format. It may therefore have a more general application.
      In the latter part of Jesus' ministry, he proclaimed the gospel in mysterious riddles as a sign of judgment upon a people who had refused to repent. Such parables, usually introduced by the phrase "the kingdom of heaven is like", need to be distinguished from teaching parables which primarily serve as illustrations.
      The parable is similar to one in Luke, 14:15-24, but given the significant differences, it is likely that both are independent parables based on a similar theme.
      The interpretation of the parable is somewhat difficult in that it comes in two parts. Commentators tend to work on two contrasting ideas, such that the two parts serve as a two-pronged warning: i] the need to accept the gospel's invitation. In varying degrees this is related to Israel's, or more particularly, the failure of the religious elite to accept Jesus, and ii] the need for those who accept the invitation to respond appropriately (obedience/discipleship, etc.). So, for example:
          Hill: "Entry in the kingdom may be gratuitous, but the kingdom is not characterized by libertinisim."
          France: The parable focuses on Israel's rejection of the gospel and therefore, the free offer of salvation to the lost, yet "though entry to God's salvation is free to all, it is not therefore without standards, or to be taken lightly."
          Carson: Illustrating "the contempt with which Israel as a whole treats God's grace." Also making the point that "it does not follow that all who respond positively actually remain for the banquet."
          Hagner: "the pericope contains not only the good news of an open, rather than a restricted invitation, but also the sobering reminder of the seriousness of discipleship for those who respond."
          Morris: "Those who hear God's call and know his grace must not think that a call is the same as a response."
          Davies and Allison: Interestingly, they move back into the dark ages and argue for an allegorical interpretation. "The royal wedding feast is the eschatological banquet (also held by most modern commentators), the dual sending of the servants is .... the sending of God's messengers. The murder of the servants represents the murder of the prophets and Jesus .. the third sending of the servants is the mission of the church." The second part of the parable "allegorically describes the last judgement, which extends to those within the church", those without the "wedding garment of the resurrection body or its garment of glory." The problem with an allegorical interpretation is that it is more the product of a creative imagination than of textual analysis.
      We are best to lean toward C.H. Dodd's exposition of kingdom parables, outlined in his work "The Parables of the Kingdom", and look for an interpretation that rests on the singular idea of "the kingdom at hand", although not necessarily realized, but certainly inaugurated. Assuming that this parable is a gospel statement proclaiming the inauguration of Christ's reign, then we are confronted with the immediacy of a situation where the lost are being gathered into the presence of the messiah, who is even now casting out those who are unworthy to attend his messianic banquet. The scene is of the last-days gathering and sorting, and this day is upon us, so repent and believe.

v1
      apokriqeiV aor. pas. part. "spoke" - having answered. The participle is probably temporal. Matthew often has Jesus "answering", although Jesus hasn't actually been asked a question, so "Jesus again addressed them in parables", Moffatt.
      autoiV "to them" - Specifically "the chief priests and the Pharisees", but possibly the crowds, Israel.
      palin adv. "again" - Possibly tying this parable to the previous two addressed to the Jewish leaders, but also just indicating he is again into speaking in mysteries, "once again", CEV.

v2
      oJmoiwqh (oJmoiow) aor. pas. "is like" - is like. "May be compared to the situation where a ....."
      gamouV (oV) "wedding banquet" - In the singular "a marriage", in the plural, as here, "a wedding feast." Most commentators identify this banquet with the last-days gathering before the Ancient of Days, but this idea probably just reflects our tendency to spiritualize. The parable proclaims the reign of Christ now and thus, now is the hour of judgment.

v3
      touV keklhmenouV (kalew) perf. pas. part. "to those who had been invited" - to the ones having been invited. Participle as a substantive. Indicating a previous invitation, as was the custom.
      ouk hqelon elqein "they refused to come" - they did not want to come. Expressing a determination of the will not to attend, "the guests refused", CEV.

v4
      allouV doulouV "more servants" - other servants/slaves. Probably in the sense of sending the servants out again rather than a different lot of servants, "a second time he sent out some servants."
      to ariston (on) "dinner" - Originally breakfast, but latter referring to a main meal, "a feast", "my banquet is now ready", Weymouth.
      ta sitista adj. "fattened cattle" - fattened. Adjective as a noun. It could be fattened anything, even the oxen, "fatlings", Williams.

v5
      amelhsanteV (amelew) aor. part. "they paid no attention" - having paid no attention. The participle is best treated as attendant circumstance, expressing action accompanying the main verb "left / went off"; "they went off and paid no attention." Expressing negligence, indifference, having no care for. "They completely disregarded the invitation", Barclay.
      thn emporian (a) "[to his] business" - Any business, but the word expresses movement, indicating that travel was involved in many businesses. "Store", TEV.

v6
      uJbrisan (uJbrizw) aor. "mistreated" - seriously insulted. To treat something as absolutely worthless, "treated them disgracefully", Phillips. It is details like this that lends the parable to spiritualizing.

v7
      wrgisqh (orizw) aor. pas. "was enraged" - was angry. Probably an inceptive aorist where the beginning of the action is emphasized, "now the king became angry."
      strateumata (a atoV) "his army" - troops. "Sent his troops", Barclay, Phillips....
      thn polin autwn eneprhsen "burned their city" - the city of them he burned. Some like to argue that this is an image of the destruction of Jerusalem (which destruction?). When we go down the allegory trail anything is possible.

v8
      eJtoimoV estin "is ready" - Present tense, "is now."
      ouk hsan axioi "did not deserve to come" - were not worthy, fitting, proper. "Did not deserve the honor", REB.

v9
      taV diexodouV (oV) "the street corners" - thoroughfares, road intersections. Probably where the roads converge in the village square and thus, where the poor would normally gather waiting for casual work.

v10
      ponhrouV te kai agaqouV "both good and bad" - both wicked and good. Probably just an example of stylistic language expressing a universal request, rather than a theological statement, for say, Gentiles and Jews, unclean and clean, etc. "Tell everyone you meet to come to the banquet", CEV.

v11
      ouk endedumenon (enduw) perf. mid. part. "not wearing" - not having been clothed. The participle is adjectival, modifying "man". The negation is unusual, possibly serving to emphasize the "not".
      enduma gamou "wedding clothes" - with wedding garments. The spiritualizing possibilities are endless, but interestingly Origin and his ilk, tended to take the view that it's all about garments that have been cleaned for the wedding (washed with the blood of Christ?). Jeremias agrees. Other possibilities include, clothed with the righteousness of Christ, putting on right behavior, godly virtues, baptismal raiment (the rite of the church), angelic/eschatological garments, etc. Commentators tend to argue that either we supply the garment, eg. good works, faithfulness ...., or God supplies the garment, eg. forgiveness, the righteousness of Christ.... The options are many and are more the product of imagination than good exegesis. No clues are supplied in the text, indicating that we should not go past the simple image of divine sorting, and given the importance of being sorted, particularly sorted-out, the expositor should be more than satisfied!

v12
      eJtaire (oV) voc. "friend" - friend, companion. A kindly address to a person.
      oJ de efimwqh (fimow) aor. pas. "the man was speechless" - but he was muzzled. "There was nothing he could say", TH.

v13
      dhsanteV (dew) aor. part. "bind" - having tied. The participle is best translated as an imperative, coordinate with "throw", ie. an imperatival attendant circumstance participle. The person is bound so he can't get back into the feast. He represents all those "called", but not "chosen."
      eiV to skotoV to exwteron "into the darkness" - into the outer darkness. The place of the rejected, "the darkness outside", Phillips.
      oJ brugmoV (oV) "gnashing" - chattering. Describing anger, "rage". The phrase "where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" is a descriptive for the judgment of the wicked and is repeated in Matthew a number of times, 13:42, 50, 24:51, cf. Lk.13:28. For those who stand approved in the day of judgment, there will be no more mourning or weeping, but for the sinner, there will be nothing but wailing and rage. Note the Old Testament precedence for this image, Job 16:9, Ps.34:16, 36:12, 111:10, Lam.2:16.

v14
      polloi .... oligoi "many .... few" - Possibly a comparison between the totality of those invited with the small number of the chosen, cf. Jeremias.
      eklektoi adj. pl. "chosen" - A person's response to the invitation ("called") indicates whether they are part of God's "chosen people", that is, "the elect". The response of Israel to the gospel illustrates that although they were "called", only few were "chosen." In the end, Christ is the elect son of God, and we share with him in this status when we respond to the invitation to share in God's free grace in Christ.


[Printer icon]   A print friendly justified 10pt Times New Roman version sized to fit a 1 page A4, or 2 page A5 format.
 
[Pumpkin Cottage]
Pumpkin Cottage Ministry Resources
Lectionary Bible Studies and Sermons
www.lectionarystudies.com