Presented to the Swift Current Corps, 19 September 2010
By Captain Michael Ramsay
I remember this story that someone told me once. I don’t remember who told it to me so I can’t give him credit but there was an inner-city teacher in the United States somewhere. Now, I have done some inner-city teaching in BC and that is tough enough: There are many latchkey kids and many broken homes that can contribute to some challenges. I remember in one class of mine, there was even a grade three student who was extorting money from older kids, which was problem enough, but when you add in some of the inter-racial problems in the U.S. and the seemingly insurmountable economic inequality there it can get even worse, I understand. This inner-city teacher in the U.S. was having more than a little bit of a problem with his elementary school class. The kids were loud, disrespectful, acting out and a lot of them were already in gangs. They were dangerous. There was one little boy Johnny who was causing a lot of the problems (his brother was the leader of one of the gangs) when one day the teacher got called out of the classroom for an emergency. There was no one to cover his often out-of-control class and he didn’t know what to do. It was an emergency; he had to leave the classroom. In an act of desperation or of faith, the teacher turned to Johnny – who was often the instigator of the problems – and said, “Johnny, I am putting you in charge; you are responsible to make sure that the class is quiet; I am trusting you.” The teacher leaves the room. He is gone for quite a while. When he starts down the hallway back to his class – he hears nothing. It is quiet. He walks up to the door of his classroom: nothing, it is quiet. He opens the door and sees everyone sitting at their desks not making a single noise and wondering how this could be; he spies Johnny quietly sitting cross-legged on the teacher’s desk…pointing a loaded gun at the class. ‘They didn’t make a noise, sir, not a noise.’ (I never tried that classroom management technique!)
Our story today is about an authority figure who goes away and what happens when he returns.[1] Jesus tells a parable about a noble who goes away, his faithful slaves and wicked citizens (Luke 19:11-27).[2] As we read earlier, the nobleman leaves on a journey to a distant country to get royal power granted to him. During his absence, he gives responsibility for some of his money to his slaves and he orders them to “Do business with these until I come back (Luke 19:13).” When he returns in his full authority (cf. v.12), he seeks to find out how much they had gained through trading. One slave has a ten-fold increase and is rewarded with the rule of 10 cities in the new realm; another with a five-fold increase is awarded 5 cities to rule: the noble is very generous; however, a third slave fails to invest the noble’s money. He instead lays the accusation before the noble that “you are a harsh man; you take what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow (v.21).” The noble then takes the money from the man and gives it to the one who is blessed with the 10-fold increase.[3]
This parable is similar to one recorded in Matthew 25:14-30: the so-called ‘Parable of the Talents’. Matthew and Luke might be here each relaying their memories of the same event: that of Jesus telling one specific parable to a group of people.[4] Matthew and Luke instead may be recording two separate occasions when Jesus relays different versions of the same story. It is more likely however that Jesus made more than one use of this same basic idea – such as many preachers do of their favourite illustrations:[5] I – for example – have told my parachute story a number of times and contexts and published it in more than one publication.[6] I think Jesus is doing the same thing here: using a good story to make a good couple of points.
If we look we will notice that there are some significant differences between Matthew’s record of Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30) and Luke’s story that we have before us today.[7] In Matthew, Jesus is concerned with people of different abilities (and varying amounts of responsibilities) to whom are assigned tasks: each person receives a different amount of money to invest but in Luke’s account each person is given the same intial amount: one mina.
In Luke’s account, significantly, this scenario is also weaved together with another parable; that about the citizens of the noble’s country: they hate him. The people tell him after he leaves that they don’t want him to rule over them. They openly rebel. When the noble returns then he demands, “These enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and slaughter them in my presence” (Luke 19:27). The implications of this latter scenario are easy for us to understand: if we rebel against the Son of Man, when he returns in his full authority, we will suffer the natural and logical results, the appropriate consequences.[8] The citizens of the city voted out God their King, so when Jesus returns what will he do to the members of this wicked republic? They will be crushed by the kingdom to come. As they reject him they will suffer the consequences (Luke 19:27). If we reject him we will suffer the consequences (TSA Doctrines 7, 9, 11). This is obvious. But Jesus tells this story in conjunction with another story: the story of the slaves (or employees).
What about the slaves? The slaves – unlike the wicked citizens - are in the direct employ of the master. The nobleman trusts them with taking care of a portion of his wealth. They do not openly rebel like the citizens. Not one of them rejects the Lord by trying to free themselves from his rule, yet one of them today in our story meets a similar fate to the wicked and rebellious citizens of the city: he is relieved of his responsibilities (in Matthew’s account he is thrown outside where there is ‘weeping and gnashing of teeth’, Matthew 25:30). I will go into this more but first I think we should put the story in its historical context.
Jesus isn’t just speaking in the abstract here. He is speaking about something that those listening to him would readily understand – particularly the elders. Jesus is talking politics. Jesus is talking about the politics of his day. Jesus is saying that he is going away and will come back with his kingdom and Jesus in saying that he is going away and will come back with his kingdom – soon and very soon – reminds his listeners of what King Herod did just before Jesus was born. Herod the Great (73 – 4 BCE), as he was called, went to the superpower of his day, Rome, and asked to be made king of Judea (40 BCE). His request was granted but there was some resistance among the citizens. So when he with the help of the Superpower’s military might overcame that resistance, what do you think happened to his political opponents? What happens to political appointees here whenever a new government takes over? Their heads roll, metaphoricaly speaking; well, when Herod became king his opponents’ heads literally rolled (cf. Josephus, Antiquities i..358).[9] When Christ returns, likewise, what will happen to those who do not accept his kingship? Only those who do accept his lordship will be a part of his Kingdom.
Back to Herod the Great: in his will he divided his realm between three of his sons, all of whom in due course went to Rome like he did before them, to press their claims with the occupying power. One of Herod’s sons, in Jesus’ lifetime, Archelaus had been named king of Judea in the will, but the people hated him so much that they rebelled by sending their own representatives to petition the Superpower that he not be given the kingdom.[10] Now Archelaus was never made king; Caesar gave him a lesser title but Caesar still did allow him to rule so when Archelaus came back to enforce his rule, how do you think he treated the rebellious citizenry? He didn’t treat his rebellious citizenry too kindly: at the first Passover after his accession, for one example, he massacred about 3,000 of his subjects (Josephus, Bellum ii.10–13; cf. for other examples of his cuelty Josephus, Antiquities xvii. 224, 229, 250, 304, 307, 340). Jesus tells the people this parable because he is going away soon and the people who are anticipating his coming kingdom understand what it means for a king (or noble) to go away and receive royal power and they know first hand what happens to those who rebel against that king, when he returns. They understand this. They know what happens to people who reject the king, when his kingdom comes. And I hope we understand this too because Jesus’ kingdom is coming - but what about the slaves?
What about the slaves? There are 10 slaves who are in the direct employ of the master in this story. They are his employees. They already work for him and the master takes care of their needs. They are not like the citizens of the occupied country. They belong to their master like we Christians belong to our master. They are already employed in his service and are under his authority and his protection. These 10 salves are also trusted people – notice how he rewards the ones who are faithful with the one mina each: he makes them responsible for 10 and 5 whole cities respectively in his new kingdom (Luke 19:17, 19). This message could not have been lost on Jesus’ disciples. This message would not have be lost on those following him in the crowd. This good news should not be lost on us: as we are faithful with the mina that God has given each of us (the mina in this case is very probably - as opposed to Matthew’s Parable of the Talents – the ability to spend our time and talents sharing the good news of the proleptic Kingdom of God; cf. Acts 12:24)[11] As we are faithful with our responsibility of sharing this good news of the Kingdom of God, and all that God has given us; when Jesus returns he will reward us by giving us even more responsibility. As we use the knowledge and the talents with which we have been entrusted until Christ’s return, when he comes back with how much more will he trust us?
What about the other eight slaves though? Seven of the slaves perform unremarkably. Jesus informs his audience how 3 of the 10 slaves perform their duties. The first two, as we have already mentioned, do really well. I regularly have my performance reviewed by my bosses, and I have the opportunity to sit down with each of our employees in the various departments of The Salvation Army in Swift Current (Thrift Store, Community and Family Services, Justice, etc.) to do their employee reviews anually if not more often. Every staff member needs to pass an employee evaluation after their first three months here in order to be taken off probation: if they fail the review, they are let go; if they pass the evaluation they receive their full benefits package. (John here just had an employee evaluation not too long ago.) The noble going away in the text before us today is not unlike a probation period for the slaves in this story. The first two slaves: they pass their three-month probation period with flying colours and are given a raise and more responsibilities; but what about the other slave? How does the third employee do when it is his turn for the employee evaluation?
What about this other slave? He doesn’t do so well. His boss gives him exactly the same opportunity, exactly the same amount that he gives his other trusted employees for the probation period: 1 mina (about 3 months wages).[12] He gives him exactly the same amount of time and he rightly expects that the employee will faithfully carry out his responsibilities. He expects him to put the money to work. The third slave does not though and we are given a brief glimpse of his employee review, Luke 19:21-24:
"Then another servant came and said, 'Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.'
"His master replied, 'I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?'
"Then he said to those standing by, 'Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'
This is how the slave’s employee review went. Not quite as well as the others. Picture this with me for a moment. If my boss poked her head in here and asked me to get the bus winterized, paint the thrift store, and fix a broken window at the quarters and I didn’t do it, how well do you think that would go over? I know that if I asked any of the staff here directly to do something when I was on holidays and when I came back and it wasn’t done, I would be not be happy. If that employee was on probation and completing these tasks were a condition of his continued employment, you can guarantee that he would be gone and his responsibilities would be given to someone else. But there is more.
This employee was working for the master but he was not very good. This slave did nothing with his mina but lay it away in a napkin. This did not comply even with the minimum legal requirements for safety, which specified that the money should be at the very least buried in the ground (Talmud, Baba Metzia 42a).[13] This slave knew better. He was an employee of the master but he did not do his job and so even what responsibilities he did have were taken away from him (see Doctrine 9 of The Salvation Army). But there is even more.
While the employer is looking over his file, the employee – I guess he is sensing that things aren’t going so well and realizing that he hasn’t done what he is supposed to do – he pipes up and he says to his boss who has power of life and death over him, he says, verse 21, ‘I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and [you] reap what you did not sow.’ The employee gets defensive and blames his employer for his own incompetence. How could he think that this was going to go well? He can’t. He is relieved of his responsibilities.
This brings us to the crux of the matter. As the citizens are those who reject Jesus as king, the unfaithful slave represents those of us who claim him as king but fail to carry out our responsibilities. When Jesus returns it is not enough to claim to be his slave, to claim to be a Christian, we must actively use what he has given us to work for him or we risk forfeiting our reward (TSA Doctrine 9).[14] Each of us here has been entrusted with the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. We can be like the third slave; we can hide this gospel in a napkin in our pocket and not tell anyone about it. We can take the time and the talents with which we have been entrusted and waste them if we like but that doesn’t change the fact that Jesus is coming back and when he comes back those of us who act like the wicked servants will be sent away to eternal punishment (TSA Doctrine 11; cf. also Matthew 31).
Alternatively and preferably though like the first two slaves in this story, while we are awaiting Christ’s return we should take full advantage of the opportunity to liberally invest this Gospel of the Kingdom of God into everyone we meet. We should faithfully dedicate all our time and talents into serving God, spreading the gospel and growing His investment in us. This year, we as a corps have committed ourselves to evangelism and sharing the good news of the Kingdom of God. So today the choice is ours, we can choose to waste our talents and thus bury the good news in a napkin in our pocket or we can invite anyone and everyone we know to come to church, to come to Bible study, to come to Home League, and kids club, to come to prayer meeting and to come to the Lord. And as we are faithful in this, when our Lord returns in the full power of his kingdom, He will indeed welcome us saying, ‘well done my good and faithful servant’.
Let us pray.
www.sheepspeak.com
---
[1] As relayed in Luke’s Gospel, the Kingdom of God is invading the present. People, knowing but not completely understanding this, assume that it will be fully realised in the immediate future (Luke 19:11).
[2] Leon Morris: ‘Luke: An Introduction and Commentary’, Downers Grove, IL : InterVarsity Press, 1988 (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries 3), S. 290: The reference to a far country shows that he cannot be expected to return very soon
[3] Captain Michael Ramsay, 'The Ethics of Jesus in Luke’s Gospel as reflected in parables spoken en route to Jerusalem', Presented to William and Catherine Booth College (Fall 2006). Available on-line: http://sheepspeak.com/NT_Michael_Ramsay.htm#Ethics of Jesus in Luke’s Gospel
[4] Matthew possibly firsthand; Luke most likely second-hand.
[5]Leon Morris: ‘Luke: An Introduction and Commentary’, Downers Grove, IL : InterVarsity Press, 1988 (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries 3), S. 290
[6] Captain Michael Ramsay, 'Judges 11:29-40: Jephthath's Parachute' Presented to Nipawin and Tisdale Corps on May 24, 2008. Available on-line: http://sheepspeaks.blogspot.com/2008/05/judges-1129-40-japhtheths-parachute.html; and Captain Michael Ramsay, 'Do Miracles Still Happen?' The Nipawin Journal (September 2008). Available on-line: http://www.sheepspeak.com/sasknews.htm#miracles and Captain Michael Ramsay, 'Jephthah’s Parachute: Covenant and Judges 11:29-40' in the Journal of Aggressive Christianity, Issue 59 (February-March 2009), pp. 5-10. Available on-line: http://www.armybarmy.com/JAC/article2-59.html
[7] Cf. Fred B. Craddock, Luke (Interpretation: a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: John Knox Press: Louisville, Ken., 1990), 221: some scholars argue that Luke combined to existing parables of Jesus here.
[8] Captain Michael Ramsay, 'The Ethics of Jesus in Luke’s Gospel as reflected in parables spoken en route to Jerusalem', Presented to William and Catherine Booth College (Fall 2006). Available on-line: http://sheepspeak.com/NT_Michael_Ramsay.htm#Ethics of Jesus in Luke’s Gospel
[9] Cf. R. Alan Culpepper, Luke (NIB 8: Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1995), 363.
[10] cf. Leon Morris: ‘Luke: An Introduction and Commentary’, Downers Grove, IL : InterVarsity Press, 1988 (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries 3), S. 290 and Expositor's Bible Commentary, The, Pradis CD-ROM:Luke/Exposition of Luke/V. Teaching and Travels Toward Jerusalem (9:51-19:44)/F. Final Approach to Jerusalem (18:31-19:44)/4. Parable of the ten minas (19:11-27), Book Version: 4.0.2
[11] Fred B. Craddock, Luke (Interpretation: a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: John Knox Press: Louisville, Ken., 1990), 223.
[12] Walter L. Leifeld, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Pradis CD-ROM:Luke/Exposition of Luke/V. Teaching and Travels Toward Jerusalem (9:51-19:44)/F. Final Approach to Jerusalem (18:31-19:44)/4. Parable of the ten minas (19:11-27), Book Version: 4.0.2
[13] Leon Morris, Luke: An Introduction and Commentary. Downers Grove, IL : InterVarsity Press, 1988 (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries 3), S. 291
[14] Captain Michael Ramsay, 'The Ethics of Jesus in Luke’s Gospel as reflected in parables spoken en route to Jerusalem', Presented to William and Catherine Booth College (Fall 2006). Available on-line: http://sheepspeak.com/NT_Michael_Ramsay.htm#Ethics of Jesus in Luke’s Gospel
Posts
