September 3, 2008 + Yesterday's challenges — today's opportunities + Hayward Fong

Isaiah 5:1-7; Matthew 21:33-44; Mark 12:1-11;
Luke 20:9-18; Hebrews 1:1, 2

For the Gospel reading this morning, I only read from the record according to St. Matthew. This parable appears almost identically in all three Synoptic gospels, showing the deep and lasting impression it must have made on the writers. When you go home, read the other two versions as recorded in Mark and Luke.

Our reading today is a parable of defiance. In it, Jesus faces His own fate and at the same time challenges those who would kill Him with a threat that they could not help but understand. Too often we fail to recognize His reckless defiance as He came to Jerusalem for the last time. Throughout those final days, he shunned security and seemed to deliberately focus attention upon Himself challenging his adversaries to take their best shots.

The first evidence of this is the Triumphant Entry (Luke 19:28-40). We of the western mind lose the significance of His arriving on an ass. In Palestine, the ass is not a despised animal, but rather a noble one. Kings only rode horses in battle; when they came in peace, they rode an ass. So Jesus’ Entry was a dramatic claim to be a king. When He entered the city, He proceeded to do something that would shock the ecclesiastical powers; He cleansed the Temple, drove out the money changers and seller of doves (Luke 19:45, 46). It is small wonder the priests and scribes came to Him wanting to know who gave Him the authority to do these things (Luke 20:1, 2). It was this challenge that gave rise to this parable. By this time, it was clear that Jesus was going to die. He was not going to go like a hunted criminal but like a king.

He turned to the prophet Isaiah in setting the stage for this parable, using one of the most ancient symbols for the nation of Israel, the vineyard of God (Isaiah 5:1-7). No one who heard the parable would have any doubt as to what Jesus was talking about.

Because Palestine was a troubled nation at this time in history, absentee landlords were a common occurrence. It was not unusual for a man to let out his property and take off for a more comfortable country. When this was done, the rent was paid in three ways (1) a fixed amount of money, (2) an agreed portion of the crop, or (3) a definite amount of the produce whatever the yield may be. Palestine was experiencing all types of political unrest coupled with labor troubles. So the incidents told in the parable were common occurrences and easily recognized by His listeners.

In this parable every detail has a meaning. The vineyard denotes the people of Israel; the master of the vineyard is God; the husbandmen represent the priests and the rulers who controlled the affairs of Israel; the servants who were sent and ill-treated are cast in the roles of the prophets whom God sent in every age and who were often ignored and sometimes martyred; the Son is Jesus Himself. So then this parable gives a vivid picture of God’s care for Israel. His long patient pleading with His people, Israel’s continual rejection of God’s way, the coming of Jesus, the death of Jesus, and finally His ultimate triumph and final discomfiture of His enemies, who thought they had eliminated Him.

Certain points stand out clearly in this parable. First, it stresses human privilege. It is clear that everything possible was done for the vineyard. It was hedged so marauding animals could not get in. The wine press, a great stone-lined pit in the ground had been dug so that the grapes could be pressed and the juice extracted. A watch tower had been built so the watchmen could keep guard against robbers (Matthew 21:33). All through history everything had been done for the nation of Israel so they might be ready to recognize God’s Son when He came. In spite of all their privileges they failed entirely.

One of the supreme tests of life is, “How did we use our privileges?” Oscar Wilde has this parable in answer to that rhetorical question. “Jesus was walking through the streets of a city. In an open courtyard, He saw a young man feasting gluttonously and growing drunk with wine. ‘Young man,’ said Jesus, ‘why do you live like that?’ ‘I was a leper,’ said the young man, ‘and you cleansed me. How else should I live?’ Jesus went on, and He saw a young girl clad in tawdry finery, a girl of the streets, and after her came a young man with eyes like a hunter. ‘Young man,’ said Jesus, ‘why do you look at the girl like that?’ ‘I was blind,’ said the young man, ‘and you opened my eyes. How else should I look?’ ‘Daughter,’ said Jesus to the girl, ‘why do you live like that?’ ‘I was a sinner,’ she replied, ‘and you forgave me. How else should I live?’ Here were three people who had received priceless gifts from Jesus and who used them like that.

You and I live in an age which has had every privilege. We have good homes, freedom of worship, a sanctuary to be our mother in the faith, parents who have given us every opportunity. We live in an age which has discovered more of the secrets of power than any other age. How then are we using our privileges? Lest we forget, we are answerable on that final day for the privileges we have received.

This parable stresses human freedom. It is significant that after the master had let out the vineyard he went away into another country (Matthew 21:33; Mark 12:1; Luke 20:9). It was as though he said, “I’ve given you this job and this responsibility; I’m not going to interfere; run it your own way.”

This parable raises the old argument regarding fate and freewill. On strictly logical grounds, it may be insoluble, but the fact remains that the instinct of man is that he is free. Every time we criticize someone, we assume he might have acted otherwise. Every time we feel regret or remorse, it is because we feel that we might have taken a kinder course of action. There can be no such thing as goodness if we are not free. Goodness lies in the choice between the higher and the lower thing.

Someone once said the difference between fate and destiny is that “fate is what we are compelled to do; destiny is what we are meant to do.” We have a destiny but we are not fated. What we are meant to do is to put ourselves on God’s side in the world. There is this story told about Arturo Toscanini rehearsing an orchestra that was not trying. Quietly he laid aside his baton and said, “Gentlemen, God has told me how He wants this piece of music played; and you—you hinder God.” So you and I have the freedom of being for or against God.

All of this leads us to the conclusion that sin is deliberate. There are three theories of sin which try to refute the deliberate element.

The first is that sin is merely traces of our ancestry. Man has evolved up from the time when he was nearer the beasts of the field and has therefore taken certain attributes of the lower things. So if we sin we are not really responsible for it. Give men time, says this theory, and they will outgrow their sins as a child outgrows bad habits. The unfortunate thing for that theory is that it collapses against the facts, for the evidence is that the higher man reaches in knowledge and power the more terrible his sins and their consequences become.

The second theory is that sin is undeveloped good. This theory would argue that man’s sins are either under developed good or good things which somehow have gone wrong. A weed is a flower which has gone astray. The knowledge and skill of a computer hacker are good qualities misused. It is then argued that sin can be eradicated by the process of education. But facts refute this theory also. At a time when education is stressed as never before, crime is as rampant as never before. Education alone cannot change the base nature of man, although it may succeed in changing him from being merely a devil into being a clever devil, which is worse.

The last theory is that sin is a physical matter of genes and constitution. Under this theory, man is not responsible for sin because, if he happens to be made that way, he cannot do anything about it. This theory clashes with the Christian concept of man, for man is not a body only. Man is body, mind and spirit, and the greatness of Christianity often lies precisely in the fact that it enables a man to conquer the things of the body by the power of the things of the soul.

This parable lays down the principle that sin is the deliberate action of man in disobedience to the known will of God.

This parable lays down still more…the patience of God. The master of the vineyard was not content with one invitation. He gave the husbandmen time and again the opportunity to mend their ways. The patience of God is the most wonderful of His attributes. When I consider the matter from the human perspective, I can’t help but wonder why God didn’t destroy the world long ago. If God had been a man with human reactions, He would undoubtedly have smashed the universe to pieces in sheer despair at the sins and follies of men. It is not the peace of God, but the pain of God that passes understanding.

The parable stresses the claim of Jesus. He deliberately sets Himself above the level of those who had gone before. The prophets who had gone before are servants but He is the well loved son. The message of the prophets was partial and fragmentary (Hebrews1:1). He is the fullness of God’s revelation to men. It is never enough to think of Jesus as only a man, not even the greatest of men. When we come face to face with the claims of Jesus our reaction must be unquestioning obedience to the one person who has the right o speak.

This parable sets forth the grim possibility of final rejection. As we have seen again and again, after entering the world Himself in the person of Jesus, God can do nothing more. If people remain unmoved by the life and death of Jesus there is no further appeal. Jesus is, as it were, the touchstone of God, and by our reaction to Him we are finally judged.

There is one final lesson. All three accounts agree that the vineyard was to be taken away from those who had it and given to others (Matthews 21:41; Mark 12:9; Luke 20:16). Behind this lies the warning that the great task which should have belonged to the Jews had been taken from them and given to the Gentiles. The Jews should have been the nation to lead all men to God. Instead they rejected God’s Son when He came; and so the task of evangelizing the world had to pass to the Gentiles whom they despised. One of the most humiliating things in the world is to be given a real task by someone whom we respect and love and then to find that, due to our weakness and foolishness, we have failed in our task and let down the person who trusted us with it. We will live well if the only thing we fear in this world is to fail God and let Him down.