Matthew 20

Matthew 20

“THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW”

Chapter Twenty Continuing His reply to Peter’ s question (“what shall we have?”), Jesus told the parable of the laborers (Matthew 20:1-16), then predicted His death and resurrection a third time as they headed toward Jerusalem (Matthew 20:17-19). When the mother of James and John requested a special place for her sons in the kingdom, Jesus said it was not His to give. He used the occasion to teach all His apostles the principle of greatness through service (Matthew 20:20-28). Leaving Jericho, Jesus gave sight to two blind men who would not let the crowds deter them (Matthew 20:29-34). POINTS TO PONDER

• Should one delay in their obedience to the gospel?

• The danger of a mercenary spirit

• The importance of humble service

REVIEW

1. What are the main points of this chapter?

• The parable of the laborers - Matthew 20:1-16- Jesus predicts His death and resurrection a third time - Matthew 20:17-19
• Greatness and serving in the kingdom - Matthew 20:20-28- Jesus heals two blind men - Matthew 20:29-34

2. Whose question had prompted the telling of the parable of the laborers? (Matthew 20:1)

• Peter’ s, cf. Matthew 19:27

3. What should not be deduced from this parable? Why? (Matthew 20:1-10)

• That it is alright to put off obeying the invitation to obeying the gospel
• Those who started later responded as soon as they were given opportunity, Matthew 20:6-7

4. What is the main point of the parable of the laborers? (Matthew 20:11-16)

• One should not begrudge others for receiving the same reward for less service

6. List the three passages in which Jesus foretold His death and resurrection

• Matthew 16:21; Matthew 17:22-23; Matthew 20:19-20

7. Who asked Jesus for a privileged position in His kingdom? (Matthew 20:20-21)

• The mother of Zebedee’ s sons (James and John) in their behalf

8. What quality is considered great in the kingdom? (Matthew 20:5-28)

• Serving others, even as Jesus came to this earth to serve

9. What commendable spirit did the two blind men manifest? (Matthew 20:30-31)

• Persistence in their request for mercy

Matthew 20:1-34 Verse 1Mat 20:1-34THE PARABLE OF THE IN THE ; THE THIRD OF THE PASSION; THE REQUEST OF ZEBEDEE’S SONS; TWO BLIND MEN AT JERICHO For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that was an householder, who went out early in the morning to hire laborers into his vineyard. (Matthew 20:1) IN THE PARABLE OF THE IN THE The householder is God. The chief steward is Jesus Christ to whom the Father hath committed judgment. The vineyard is the church. The laborers who are hired to work in the vineyard are Christians. The penny payment stands for the eternal reward in heaven. The evening is the end of life, and, in a sense, the judgment. The ones first hired represent the legalists and their “contract” with God. The ones hired last, without any agreement, are those who rely on God’s grace. The generosity of the householder represents the goodness of God. The complainers represent the self-righteousness of those who consider themselves worth more than others. The time sequence in hiring represents acceptance of the gospel call at early and later times in the life cycle of Christians. The work represents service Christians are expected to give God in his church. Only the parable of the unjust steward has elicited more numerous and diverse explanations by commentators than has this one. It will be seen from the above that here indeed is another one; but, among so many and various opinions, ONE MORE could not possibly do any harm! Many difficulties are seen no matter how the parable is explained; and yet a number of the analogies are so plain and unmistakable as to make a very vivid impression on the mind. On this first verse, let it be noted that God expects workers, not shirkers, in his kingdom. He hired laborers, not drones. The initiative, as always, rests with God and not with man. From that remote day when God went seeking Adam in Paradise, the Father still seeks people to worship and love him in order to redeem them (John 4:23). It is obvious also that God expects man to work in His farm, or vineyard; that is, in HIS church! The laborers were hired into His vineyard.

They were not told to go to work in the vineyard of their choice! Complexities in the religious conditions of the post-Reformation era, in which we live, do not relieve worshipers of the solemn obligation to make certain that they truly work in the Lord’s field, and not in another’s. The place to serve God is in the true church established by Jesus Christ. No one can suppose that the householder (God) in this parable would have rewarded the workers for labor in any field but His own. The most difficult part of this parable is the time sequence, which is met in the first line of it, continues all the way through it, is the point of contention at the end of it, and which is obviously one of the very significant things in it. Many commentators refuse to hazard an opinion as to what the “early morning” means; and some, of course, would remand it to secondary status in the parable, viewing it as incidental or inert matter. Those who have offered an explanation have made it the early part of man’s physical life, the morning of human history, the patriarchal dispensation, the Abrahamic portion of Jewish history, the personal ministry of Christ, and just about everything else. Following the view that the “evening” represents the end of life, this writer would refer the time sequence events to various ages of converts; thus, a young person accepts the call early in the morning, others later; and old persons, nearly at the end of life, are said to come in at the eleventh hour.

Verse 2 And when he had agreed with the laborers for a shilling a day, he sent them into his vineyard.The KJV uses “penny” instead of shilling for the coin. Inconsistency may appear in the fact that it is not always the young who take an attitude of “bargaining” with the Lord, so much work for so much pay. However, if our analogies be allowed, they were the ones who DID make that mistake here. Furthermore, the temptation to that very attitude is greater on the part of one who contemplates giving his whole life to God and who brings relative innocence and purity of youth to the vineyard. Conversely, the temptation is diminished in those who come later in life, scarred and broken by sin, and realizing their plight of unworthiness and hopelessness far more keenly than any young person could possibly realize it.

Verse 3 And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing in the market place idle; and to them he said, Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way. And again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise.God’s invitation to men is constant and not confined to any age or condition of life. Morning, noon, evening and twilight, the Master calls men to work in his vineyard. Notice too the Master’s evaluation of the work men do outside the church. Those not working in the vineyard are simply standing around “idle.” All is lost except what is done for Christ and at his direction. All frenzied human endeavor is the grossest idleness when contrasted with work in the vineyard of the Lord.

Verse 6 And about the eleventh hour, he went out, and found others standing; and he saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle? They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard.One of the mysteries is why these men were not hired earlier. If, as the householder suggested, they had been standing around all day, why had they not been hired already? The householder was then on his fifth trip to the marketplace; laborers were urgently needed; and it may not be supposed that the householder had deliberately passed them by without an invitation; and yet they alleged that the reason for their unemployment was their lack of opportunity to work, or lack of an employer. Difficult as that may appear, however, the analogy Jesus sought to convey in this situation, and as it applies to spiritual things, is far easier to understand.

God is calling people all the time; but, through the influence of Satan, some do not hear, or hearing do not believe, or believing yield to various seductive deterrents. Therefore, we reject the view that those eleventh hour workers were justified in their day-long idleness on the grounds that they had had no chance to work. True, that is what THEY said the reason was; but we appeal to the words of the householder as a complete refutation of their flimsy alibi. It is quite easy to believe men rather than God, as witnessed by the commentators who accept the paper-thin alibi of those late workers. Would the wise and generous householder (standing here for God Himself) have charged those men with idleness unless he in fact had seen them on his repeated trips to the marketplace? No, we dare not disallow the charge of the householder on the basis of the weak excuse they gave.

It is a further commentary on the love, fairness; and goodness of God, that the householder accepted them anyway. This view should not be embarrassing. The attempt to show that the eleventh-hour workers responded as soon as they had a chance is an unconscious effort to lend merit where none existed. The groundless view that this interpretation might encourage one to wait until the evening of life to respond to the gospel call is negated when it is remembered what a frightful chance those late workers took. Who could have dared to suppose that the householder would again appear in the twilight on his fifth mission to the market place? The gospel abounds with warnings that the first call should be heeded. “Behold, NOW is the accepted time.”

Verse 8 And when even was come, the Lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the laborers, and pay them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.The chief steward in this analogy is Christ our Lord to whom the Father hath committed judgment; he is the head of the church and shall preside at the judgment of the Great Day. Christ shall mete out to the wicked and to the righteous their just dues. When even was come indicates the end of earthly life; and, due to the association of judgment with life’s end, it has a dual significance, applying not only to the end of life in the earthly phase of the kingdom but having an application to the eternal judgment also. In any case, no pay until evening. That is the big message here. Men may never abandon their labors in the church on the assumption that they have done enough. Those in advancing years should take sharp notice of this. Payment will come at the end of the day; and it may be dogmatically assumed that any who abandoned work earlier received nothing at all for their labors. It corresponds to Bible teaching that these men were paid at the end of the day (see Deuteronomy 24:15; Leviticus 19:1-37; Leviticus 18:1-30; Leviticus 17:1-16; Leviticus 16:1-34; Leviticus 15:1-33; Leviticus 14:1-57; Leviticus 13:1-59; Job 7:2; Malachi 3:5; James 5:4).

Verse 9 And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a shilling.The representation of eternal life by so small a consideration as a day’s wages raises a question and certainly stands opposite from the usual analogies employed by the Lord, such as the hidden treasure, the pearl of great price, and the banquet in the king’s house. However, special considerations that required the approach adopted here is discovered in the events and conversations that concluded Matthew 19:1-30. The great wealth of the rich young ruler and his inability to give it up to follow Christ, and the subsequent fixation of the apostles’ attention on the problem of rewards and sacrifices, and the Saviour’s elaboration of the believer’s great reward (see on Matthew 19:29) - all these things had contrived to throw the whole problem out of perspective. This parable is a reduction of the whole economy of redemption to such a minute scale that those apostles, accustomed to dealing with small things, would have no difficulty at all grasping the truth. Eternal life, together with all spiritual blessings, is made to correspond to so simple and ordinary a thing as a shilling, a day’s pay; and all the sacrifices, labors, and exertions of men to attain eternal life are made to appear as a day’s work, or even a very small fraction of a day’s work. Suppose that some incredibly wealthy and fabulous city, such as New York, should be sold for fifteen cents, or fifteen dollars!

Who could quibble about the price either way? Price simply bears no relationship whatever to the purchase in such supposition.

That is exactly what Christ was teaching in this parable. Whatever people do, however long or short their service to God, whatever of sacrifice, blood, or tears, however soon or late they began to serve him, the reward is so fantastically great that the conditions for obtaining it, whether more or less in certain cases, must forever appear utterly and completely insignificant. Nor is the shilling, or penny, a problem in this view. Christ had just elaborated the rewards at the end of the last chapter; and the shilling appears in the parable as the symbol of those rewards simply because that was the usual day’s pay in that age. Even so, it is not inappropriate, because a day’s wage is the support of life, not only in that age but in every age. Even a geographer knows the device of making a cipher stand for the world itself!

Verse 10 And when the first came, they supposed that they would receive more; and they likewise received every man a shilling.The expectation of those men was groundless because they had firmly agreed with the householder for a shilling a day. Their expectation of more resulted from the comparison they made between themselves and the ones who came to work later. It was that very thing, the envy, jealousy, and petty attention to little differences - it was all that Jesus was trying to remove from the apostles’ hearts. The perverse and sinful judgments and rankings of themselves among themselves, with the consequent jockeying and maneuvering for position and advantage - these things constitute one of man’s most shameful and hurtful patterns of behavior. Paul paid his respects to that vice in these words: For we are not bold to number or compare ourselves with certain of them that commend themselves: but they themselves, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves with themselves, are without understanding (2 Corinthians 10:12). The workers first employed fell into that same foolish trap. As a result, they developed a conceit that turned to outrage when the householder made them equal to the latecomers.

Verse 11 And when they received it, they murmured against the householder, saying; These last have spent but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.That the human race needed this parable is perfectly evident from the fact that most people can find a feeling of sympathy for the viewpoint of the “firsters”! There are many in all generations who would have been just as outraged as were they. And why were they angry? The householder had interfered with and upset their petty schedule of ranks and values. The inflated evaluation of themselves as compared with the latecomers had been unceremoniously kicked in the teeth. They had no case, but their spiteful anger flared just the same.

Every minister of the gospel has heard this same murmuring in the church when someone says, “Why should he be a deacon; I’ve been in this congregation twenty years!” “Why should that man be an elder or on the building committee? My Uncle Charlie started this church in a schoolhouse; we’ve all been members here since it started? This is exactly what Christ was fighting in this parable. “Thou hast made them equal to US!” There is the bull’s eye of the trouble. WE are the people. WE have done the work, shouldered the load, borne the heat, and carried the mail. Those latecomers ought to be away down on the scale compared to US! Every church on earth has the US problem. It existed among the sacred numbers of the twelve apostles. But wherever the problem exists, nothing solves it like getting things in the proper perspective. That is what Jesus sought to do with this parable. The FIRST ones became last by their very bitterness and pettiness and their self-righteous preferment of themselves above others; and those LAST became first by their loving trust of the householder. That is the principal point Christ himself drew from the parable. See Matthew 19:29 and Matthew 20:16.

Verse 13 But he answered and said to one of them, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a shilling?The cause of the trouble in that ancient vineyard was not the generous and loving householder but the spiteful jealousy of the laborers hired that morning. Jesus’ use of the word “Friend” here does not carry the same connotation that the word has for many in our day. He thus addressed Judas who came to betray him (Matthew 26:50).

Verse 14 Take up that which is thine, and go thy way; it is my will to give unto this last, even as to thee.Note the words, “take up.” Can it be that some of those disgruntled workers had even thrown their pay on the ground at the chief steward’s feet? The words do certainly suggest that. What an insight such conduct affords. What a wreckage of human personality comes of envy and jealousy! Envy, pride, self-righteousness, and egotism had so embittered those men that they repudiated a fair and honorable bargain, turned on their benevolent employer, murmured against him, and threw their wages on the ground! Here, of course, is the point that most commentators find so difficult. Ancient and modern expositors alike seem to stumble on the problem, “How can people like that be represented as redeemed?” The complainers in the parable actually appear as having their wages thrust upon them after having thrown their pay on the ground. They were the ones who worked all day in the vineyard, and they were the ones who went home with their just pay. How can salvation be justly ascribed to men with such a pattern of behavior and with such an attitude? To be sure, the difficulty might be avoided by making this incident an inert or inactive part of the parable; but it received too much stress for that. This writer views it as another example of the Father’s goodness, just like that represented by the father of the prodigal son who received him, and later went and entreated the elder brother also. We conclude that God will save even people like that if they give Him half a chance to do so. If we disallow such a possibility, we fall into the same error as the “firsters” in supposing that we meek and gentle trusters of God’s grace are better than THEY, and that the good householder would in some way injure US (there’s that word again) if he saved sinners like them! In any case, the solemn warning in the next verse is squarely directed at all the “Us-es” in either category.

Verse 15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? or is thine eye evil, because I am good?Let it be remembered that all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory. This parable shows that men may forget this in two ways: (1) They may forget it like the ones who worked all day and supposed that they were better than the ones who came later; (2) and they may forget it like the eleventh-hour workers would have forgotten it if they had objected to the householder’s payment of the “firsters” on the grounds that the “firsters” had the wrong attitude! Although such a development did not occur in the parable, such an objection against the householder is found in the writings of commentators from Origen and Irenaeus to Alford and Trench. Let no man object to God’s saving men on any grounds whatsoever: (1) whether from the allegation that some have not worked like “US,” or (2) from the allegation that their makes them inferior to “US,” or from whatever premise, real or imaginary, true or false. It is altogether righteous and lawful for God to do what he wills.

Verse 16 So the last shall be first, and the first last.It was with this declaration that the parable began and ended. The grand lesson is that men do not deserve or merit salvation. In the case of the laborers, those who worked all day did not deserve their pay after having thrown it on the ground. That act forfeited their further right to it. In spite of their lack of merit, the good householder required them to pick it up, thus giving it to them in spite of their forfeiture. The ones who labored only an hour did not deserve their pay either.

They had certainly done nothing to merit a day’s wages. Not even their wonderful “attitude” entitled them to a day’s pay. Their reward was as much of grace as was that of the bitter “firsters”! Some of the people of our own day who fancy that their sweet and pious attitude in some way entitles them to God’s favor should take note of this. The householder had every right to have cut them off with a trifle instead of a whole day’s pay. People simply do not and cannot MERIT salvation. People do not merit salvation either by works or by attitudes of trust. The meek and trustful spirit is to be desired; so also is the worker; but neither class of people, nor yet another class combining the virtues of both, can in any degree merit salvation. It is all of grace and not of debt; nor does that exclude obedience.

Verse 17 And as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples apart, and on the way, he said unto them, Behold we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests and scribes: and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him unto the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify: and the third day he shall be raised up.THE THIRD OF JESUS’ PASSIONIn the two previous prophetic announcements of his impending Passion, in Matthew 16:21 and Matthew 17:22-23, Christ had revealed the following details of his approaching death and resurrection: Death would be accomplished in Jerusalem. Scribes would have a part in it. Chief priests would be involved. The elders of the people would also be instruments of his death. He would suffer many things from them. He would not merely die, but be killed, a far different thing. He would rise from the dead. His resurrection would occur on the third day. He would fall into their hands by being “delivered up,” that is, betrayed. In the place before us, Christ added the following supplemental details: He would be condemned to death, indicating a trial by tribunal. The Gentiles would have a part in it. Gentiles would mock him. Gentiles would scourge him. Gentiles would crucify him. Thus, no less than 14 pertinent and significant details of the approaching Passion were pinpointed by Christ. In these three prophetic announcements of his Passion, it is plain that every circumstance of those awful events was fully known by the Lord BEFORE it occurred. It is stated that Jesus took the apostles “apart.” Throughout his ministry, there were numbers of occasions when Christ withdrew from the hustle and bustle of daily work to engage in prayer, meditation, contemplation, and quietness. It was in such an hour that he gathered strength to approach the cross. Disciples in all ages should not neglect the ministry of the quiet hour in which the soul may take its soundings, the true perspective be ascertained, and in which the resources of the spirit may be replenished at the fountain of prayer and meditation. Vance Havner put it like this, “`Come ye yourselves apart … and rest awhile’ ( Mark 6:31). This is a MUST for Christians. If you don’t come apart, you WILL come apart."[1] ENDNOTE:[1] Vance Havner, Pepper and Salt (Westwood, New Jersey, Fleming H. Revell Company, 1966), p. 9.

Verse 20 Then came to him the mother of the sons of Zebedee with her sons, worshipping him, and asking a certain thing of him.Christ had not yet succeeded in eliminating the “me first” virus from the hearts of the Twelve. James and John, aided by their mother, pressed him for a decision that would leave out Peter and the others. Repeated announcements of Christ’s impending death (and resurrection which they continued to ignore) only kindled greater enthusiasm on their part for solving the problem of “head man” in the church after Jesus’ death. The wife of Zebedee did a noble thing in worshipping Jesus; but her request was founded in ignorance of what his kingdom would be.

Verse 21 And he said unto her, What wouldest thou? She saith unto him, “Command that these my two sons may sit, one on thy right hand, and one on thy left hand, in thy kingdom.“The request of the wife of Zebedee meant that she wanted James and John to be the first and second ministers in the coming kingdom, envisioning such offices, no doubt, as those of Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer! Some have found a mystical fulfillment of her request in the fact that James was the first apostle to die and John was the last. If one wonders why the apostles thus behaved, it should be remembered that they were still sold under sin. The great redemption had not yet taken place.

Verse 22 But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I am about to drink? They say unto him, We are able.The word “cup” as used above refers to the bitterness of Jesus’ sufferings. He prayed in Gethsemane that “this cup” might pass from him. The ready response of James and John showed how little they understood the implications of what the Master had just said.

Verse 23 He saith unto them, My cup indeed ye shall drink: but to sit on my right hand and on my left hand, is not mine to give; but it is for them for whom it hath been prepared of my Father.Christ did not reveal who would have such honors. All such things had been prepared and predetermined by the Father in the foreknowledge of God’s eternal purpose. The whole drama of human redemption was planned “before the world was”; and the important places in his kingdom were in no sense up for grabs under the press of human ambitions. The prophecy that James and John would indeed drink of the Saviour’s cup was fulfilled when James was martyred under the sword of Herod (Acts 12:1-25), and as, in all probability, John suffered at a much later date. Christ did far more than merely deny the request of that ambitious woman on behalf of her sons. He went much further and explained that the usual concept of some men ruling over others would not be allowed in the kingdom of God under any circumstance.

Verse 24 And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation concerning the two brethren.Why this indignation against James and John? Was it not their mother who had made the request? Yes. But without doubt, James and John had also desired top honors and had enlisted the good offices of their mother to help procure the coveted positions. The indignation of the ten was properly directed. Thus, Satan used human ambition to split the very heart of Jesus’ chosen cadre of followers.

Verse 25 But Jesus called them unto him and said, Ye know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. Not so shall it be among you: but whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister; and whosoever would be first among you shall be your servant.This statement of Christ does not merely repeat a well-known fact for emphasis. This is not a case of poetry in which the meaning of the first clause is exactly duplicated in the second. The full meaning appears when the pyramidal quality of Gentile government is observed. Their Great Ones The Rulers of the Gentiles The GentilesThere are three ranks (tiers) of authority. Thus, the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over the Gentiles, and their great ones exercise authority upon the rulers of the Gentiles. Christ categorically denied any such pyramidal system of government any place whatsoever in his kingdom. “All of you are brethren” (Matthew 23:8). True greatness in Christ’s kingdom lies not in office but in service. Jesus very wisely identified such pyramided governments as “Gentile,” thus indicating their rejection in his kingdom of love and service, rather than of strutting power. That such Gentile forms of power exist in so-called Christian religions today does not nor cannot make it right.

Verse 28 Even as the son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.It is strange that the disciples did not see that quality in Jesus, or, seeing it, seemed incapable of imitating it. His humility, meekness, and utter disregard of worldly ambition did not evoke any similar attitude on the part of the Twelve. The reason appears to be in this very text. They were still sold under sin. The great ransom for man’s salvation had not yet been paid. True, the Holy Sacrifice was even then preparing to go up to Jerusalem and offer himself for the sins of all mankind, and thus to redeem them from the power of the evil one; but meanwhile the debt for sin remained undischarged, and Satan was doubling and redoubling his efforts to thwart God’s holy purpose. A ransom for many! “Who gave himself a RANSOM for all” (1 Timothy 2:6). “God sent … his Son to be the for our sins” (1 John 2:1-2). “Ye were with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, even the blood of Christ” (1 Peter 1:19). “For ye were BOUGHT with a price” (1 Corinthians 6:20). Ah, how wonderful is the thought that Christ ransoms from sin! In the terrible night of this world’s darkness and despair, how grandly do these glorious words go marching in the gloom of human wretchedness and sin - “ransomed, redeemed, propitiated, bought with a price!”

Verse 29 And as they went out from Jericho, a great multitude followed him.TWO BLIND MEN OF JERICHOThis miracle is recorded by all three of the synoptics, and their various accounts present a nice little package of “discrepancies” which are the peculiar delight of skeptics and agnostics. Trench summarized the difficulties thus: According to him (Matthew) there are TWO blind men … and only ONE in the other gospels. Luke appears at first sight partially to contradict one of these statements, and wholly the other; for him, the healed is but ONE; and Christ effects his cure not as he was , but at his COMING NIGH to the city. Mark occupies a middle place, holding in part with one of his fellow evangelists, in part with the other; with Luke, he names only one who was healed; with Matthew, he places the miracle, not at the entering into, but the going out from, Jericho; so that the three narratives, in a way as curious as it is perplexing, cross and interlace one another.[2] The problem of the time or place of this miracle, whether as Christ was leaving or entering Jericho, disappears in the light of what is certainly known about that locality. A. T. Robertson said: The discrepancy as to place, “as he went out from Jericho,” or “as he drew nigh to Jericho,” is best explained by the recent suggestion that the healing occurred after he left old Jericho, and as he was approaching the new Jericho which Herod the Great had built at some distance away.[3] Thus, as always, alleged contradictions flow out of men’s ignorance of all the facts, not out of any real errors by the sacred writers. Add to Robertson’s observation the obvious and undeniable fact that, with two Jericho’s close together, any blind beggar would naturally choose a site between them! Both and all three gospels are correct. He was entering one Jericho, leaving the other. Far from being any problem, therefore, these separate accounts are overwhelming proof that the gospel writers are independent witnesses and completely trustworthy. [2] Richard C. Trench, Notes on the Miracles (Westwood, New Jersey, Fleming H. Revell Company, 1953), p. 456. [3] A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Four Gospels (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1922), p. 149, footnote.

Verse 30 And behold, two blind men sitting by the wayside, when they heard that Jesus was passing by, cried out, saying, Lord, have mercy on us, thou son of David.The difficulty mentioned above, whether there was one healed or two, is resolved in the truth that there were actually two, as stated by Matthew; and that Luke and Mark, following a pattern often observed in the New Testament, mentioned only one, the most important (to them). Mark’s account shows that he was personally acquainted with Bartimaeus and his father. Thus, the healing of one known personally to Mark as a respected friend would naturally overshadowed other healings that occurred at the same time. There is no contradiction that Matthew named two, a fact that could be contradicted only by an assertion that Jesus healed ONLY one, a statement that neither Mark nor Luke made. Those unfortunate men heard that Jesus was passing by, and they began to cry out for mercy, calling him the Son of David, a popular Jewish name for the Messiah. It is a truth worthy of our attention that even the blind, physically, could SEE that Christ was the Holy One, thus qualifying them in this category as far more perceptive than many who were spiritually blind to the excellence of Jesus.

Verse 31 And the multitude rebuked them, that they should hold their peace: but they cried out the more, saying, Lord, have mercy on us, thou Son of David.Trench taught that the multitude might have acted out of consideration for the Master in thus trying to restrain the cries of those blind men; but it appears far more probable that Christ’s old enemies, the Pharisees, or their spies, were also present (though not mentioned), and that their efforts sprang from an evil desire to silence those loud proclamations of Christ as the Messiah, a fact so abundantly attested by Jesus’ mighty works, and so generally known among the people, that such a spark as might have been provided by the cries of those blind men could have set off a great demonstration. On no other occasion is it recorded that the multitude tried to silence a cry for help. Thus, there must have been some rare and unusual reason for it in this case. The repeated cries, “Thou Son of David,” echoing up and down the wayside were just such an affront to the Pharisees as to provoke their interference with it if, as might be supposed, they were present. Be that as it may, whether done by that multitude with or without Pharisaical inducement, Satan must have been the prime instigator. No humor may have been intended in this wonderful narrative, but elements of it are undoubtedly present. Just imagine the spiritually blind Pharisees trying to “shush” the cries of those blind beggars who were screaming to high heaven in the presence of a great multitude that here indeed was the Messiah, a fact perfectly clear to everyone except his evil lordship, the Pharisee!

Verse 32 And Jesus stood still, and called them, and said, What will ye that I should do unto you?Love stands still at the cry for help, How noble was our Lord’s conduct on that occasion! He was never heedless of the cries of the poor, the suffering, the sick, or the blind, or the unfortunate. Multitudes may be in a hurry, but Christ is not in a hurry. Here is an act of compassion that suggests a great passenger train stopping to aid a child to cross the street, or the conduct of Robert E. Lee, of whom it is said that he dismounted during a battle to lift a tiny bird back into its nest. But of course there is really nothing in the conduct of men that may properly be compared with the compassion of Jesus.

Verse 33 They say unto him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened.Mark adds the graphic words that Bartimaeus cast off his garment that he might better run to Christ. Thus, naked, or nearly so, this poor beggar, blind, despised, and suffering the most abject shame and poverty, appeared as an object of the utmost pity as he stood trembling before the Lord of Life and heard the blessed words, “What will ye that I should do unto you?” With such a word Jesus brought his petition from the general to the particular need, as Christ so often did. Naturally, there was no aching hope in a blind man’s heart that could surpass the desire to see.

Verse 34 And Jesus, being moved with compassion, touched their eyes; and straightway they received their sight, and followed him.Christ’s wonderful compassion set him apart from others. Alas, compassion is not a common human trait. How few there are who have the grace to see and the compassion to pity the sufferings of others. It is far easier to ascribe their woeful condition to their own sins or misdeeds and to go blindly and heedlessly onward without regard to those of our fellow mortals who make up the company of earth’s wretched sufferers. How glorious it is that Jesus saw the man, and all the human tragedy, and the bleeding human heart that beat beneath the beggar’s tattered shirt. H. Leo Boles observed from Mark’s account that Jesus bade them, “Go thy way.” And yet, with an affectionate disobedience, they followed him as their benefactor. It was their way to follow him, since they were obedient after all. The blessing which they sought in receiving sight may have led them to become his disciples and receive spiritual blessings.[4] ENDNOTE:[4] H. Leo Boles, A Commentary on the Gospel according to Matthew (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1961), p. 408.

McGarvey Commentary For The Matthew Chapter TwentyParable of the Laborers in the Vineyard, Matthew 20:1-161. For the kingdom.—For connects this paragraph with the closing remark in the preceding, “many that are first shall be last, and the last shall be first.” This parable is therefore intended to expound and to illustrate that thought. This intention is also indicated in verse 16, in which the parable is brought to a close by the statement, “So the last shall be first, and the first last; for many are called but few chosen.” hire laborers into his vineyard.—An elliptical expression for “hire laborers to work in his vineyard.” 2. penny a day.—A denarius a day, fifteen cents. This seems to have been the regular price for a day’s labor. 3-6. the third hour… the sixth.—As the Jews numbered the hours from six in the morning, the third was nine o’clock, the sixth was noon, the ninth was three P. M., and the eleventh was five P. M., or an hour before the close of the day. 7. no man hath hired us.—They had stood all the day idle because no man had hired them, and they had probably stood in the marketplace (ἥἀγορα, the place of public resort) for the purpose of finding employment. It is implied that the others were found idle for the same reason. 8. beginning from the last to the first.—Another elliptical expression, in which going is omitted. Beginning thus had the double effect of making conspicuous the fact that the last received a full day’s wages, and of calling forth a complaint from those who had come first. (9, 10.) 11, 12. they murmured.—They had received all that they had bargained for, and all that they had earned; but it caused them pain to see others receive the same for only one-twelfth of the labor which they had performed. 13, 14. I do thee no wrong.—No wrong was done to the murmurer, for he had agreed to work for what he received. The settlement with him was strictly just. Nor was any wrong done to the others, for they received more than they had earned. 15. Is it not lawful.—Having shown that no injustice was done, the employer now justifies the gratuity which he had given to the others, on the ground of his right to do as he would with his own, to bestow his gratuities where and when he chooses. He also traces the complaint of the murmurer to its true source by demanding, “Is thine eye evil because I am good?” An evil eye is a synonym for jealousy, and it acquired this meaning from the malicious leer with which jealousy regards its object. (Comp. Mark 7:2; 1 Samuel 18:9.) These laborers were jealous of the others because of the unmerited favor which the latter had received. 16. So the last.—Here Jesus states the point of comparison in the parable. “So”—that is, as in the parable, so in the kingdom of heaven— “the last shall be first, and the first last.” How, then, were the last first and the first last in the parable? In the payment of the laborers the householder told his steward to begin with the last and end with the first (verse 8); but this mere order of sequence in receiving the reward can not be the point of comparison, for there is nothing in the rewards of the kingdom of heaven to correspond with it. The last were first in another and much more important sense; they received a reward much greater in proportion to the labor which they had performed. Those who came last were first of all in respect to the ratio between the reward and the labor, and those who came first wore last of all in this particular. The payment of wages was not regulated by the rule of quid pro quo, so much money for so much labor; but, while there was a full reward in every case, in all except the first there was more than a reward— there was an undeserved gratuity, which showed the goodness of the householder.

The contract with those who came first, and who receive no more than they had earned, is evidently mentioned for the purpose of showing the real price of a day’s work, and setting forth the fact that the others did receive a gratuity. It has no significance in the application of the parable, but is, like a shade in a picture, intended to make the significant figures more conspicuous. Thus it is in the parable: now what is there like this in the kingdom? Peter and his companions had left all and followed Jesus, had come at his call to work in his vineyard, and he had just inquired of the Master, “What shall we have therefore?” What shall be our wages? (19:27.) He was told what their reward was to be, and then, lest they might think that those with the best prospects would be in every instance most certain of the reward, Jesus tells them that many first shall be last, and the last first; and, lest they should think that the promised reward would be only a just compensation for their sacrifices and toils, he recites the parable and says, “So the last shall be first and the first last.” That is, in the kingdom of heaven, as in the parable, rewards are not distributed on the principle of a just compensation for labor performed, but, while all labor receives a just compensation (for God is not unrighteous to forget your work and love—Hebrews 6:10), all the laborers will receive a reward far greater than they deserve— a reward which will show the goodness (verse 15) of the Master. And as a consequence of this principle of reward, the last shall be first, and the first last; that is, the last in amount of labor performed shall be first in the ratio between labor and reward, and the first in amount of labor shall be last in said ratio. This we know to be a fact; for eternal life is inconceivably more than a compensation for all that a man can do and suffer in pursuit of it, and among those who will inherit it those who will have done and suffered the least will be first in the ratio between their labor and their reward, and vice versa.Compare the thief on the cross, for example, with the apostle Paul. From the preceding interpretation it follows, that the different hours at which the laborers were called into the vineyard do not represent different periods’ of human life: for although two old men, one of whom had spent his life in the Church, and the other had just entered it, would be cases in point, yet he who becomes a Christian in childhood may, and often docs, on account of early death, do less labor for the Lord than he who is called in the meridian of life, or even in old age. This parable has often been used to encourage hope in cases of deathbed repentance. It certainly does teach, that however little the labor which a man does in the Lord’s vineyard, he will receive the final reward if only he be really in the vineyard; that is, if he be really a child of God. But whether a man who repents on his deathbed actually becomes a child of God, is a different question, and is not touched by the parable. Certainly, the eleventh-hour laborer who had stood idle all day only because no man had hired him, and who came into the vineyard as soon as he was called, can not represent the man who has been called by the gospel every hour of his life, but has rejected every call until his sun has sunk so low that he knows he can do but little work when he comes. In order to represent this class of sinners, the eleventh-hour men should have been invited early in the morning, and should have replied, “No, it is too early; I will not go now.” Then they should have been invited at the third, the sixth, and the ninth hours, and should have made some equally frivolous excuse each time; then, finally, at the eleventh hour, they should have said, “Well, as you pay a man just the same for an hour’s work as for a day’s work, and as I am very anxious to get your money, I believe I will now go.” Had they acted thus, it is not likely that they would have found the vineyard gate open to them at all. Yet such is the sharp practice which some men attempt in dealing with God. Argument of Section 1 (Matthew 20:1-16) In the series of conversations which fill the preceding section, Matthew has given proof of both the divine knowledge and the divine wisdom of Jesus. The conversation about marriage and divorce shows that he had a conception of the subject far transcending that of the age in which he lived and of all preceding ages. Indeed, it is a conception too pure and lofty for the subsequent generations of his own disciples; for thousands of them have appreciated it so little as to excuse themselves in disregarding it. In the conversation about little children, Jesus revealed in a single sentence their true relation to God— a relation which the world had not discovered, and which it has ever been slow to recognize. How many there are at the present day who regard children as totally depraved, and who either go through the form of baptizing them in order to fit them for heaven, or teach that they undergo a spiritual regeneration in the article of death! Here again the wisdom of Jesus towers high above that of the most philosophical of his followers. The conversation with the rich young man shows the power of Jesus to read the secrets of men’s hearts, detecting faults which are hidden from their own eyes. The man had said nothing to indicate a love of money; on the contrary, the extreme rectitude of his life appeared inconsistent with the damning sin of covetousness, and left him to wonder what he yet lacked of being perfect. But Jesus laid bare the hidden sin by saying to him, “Go and sell that thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.” In reference to the salvation of rich men Jesus had also made a revelation which amazed his disciples, and which many of his friends in later ages have tried to explain away because it requires too much unselfishness to suit their taste. It was a wisdom not of this world by which he spake. Finally, the foreknowledge of Jesus is exhibited in his statements about the reward awaiting his disciples, and in his illustration of that subject in the parable of the laborers. Part of his prediction had already been fulfilled when Matthew wrote his narrative; for the apostles were already sitting on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, and others had already experienced that those who forsake houses, brethren, etc., on account of his name, “shall receive manifold, and shall inherit everlasting life.” Now it is barely possible that any one of the above named exhibitions of wisdom might be accounted for by the supposition that Jesus was a man of transcendent genius; but when we consider them all together, and in connection with them consider the miraculous foreknowledge which is intermingled with them, we can account for them only on the supposition of divine inspiration. And if Jesus spoke by divine inspiration, his claim to be the Messiah and the Son of God is established beyond controversy.

Third Prediction of His Death, Matthew 20:17-19. (Mark 10:32-34; Luke 18:31-34)17. going up to Jerusalem.—Having followed Jesus, on his departure from Galilee, into Perea, where the conversations of the last section took place, Matthew now starts with him from some point in that country, on his last journey to Jerusalem. Much matter related by John (perhaps all from his seventh to his eleventh chapter inclusive), and some related by Luke (17:1-18:14), are here omitted. the twelve disciples apart.—As on the two former occasions, Jesus makes the announcement of his death to his immediate followers alone. Such an announcement to the unbelieving multitude would have confirmed them in their unbelief, and at the same time it might have encouraged his enemies in their machinations against him. 18, 19. shall be betrayed.—In these verses Jesus describes his arrest, condemnation, and sufferings, precisely as they afterward occurred. First, he was to be “betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes,” which was done by Judas. Second, he was to be condemned by them to death, and to be delivered to the Gentiles, which was done when the Sanhedrim pronounced him guilty and called on Pilate to execute him. Third, the Gentiles were “to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him,” which was done by the soldiers of Pilate with his consent. Fourth, on the third day he was to rise again, and this was effected by the power of God. If we only credit Matthew’s statement, that this prediction was made by Jesus while he was yet alive and before he made his last visit to Jerusalem, we must regard it as one of the most remarkable predictions recorded even in the Bible. Ambition of James and John, Matthew 20:20-28. (Mark 10:35-45)20. mother of Zebedee’s children.—Her name was Salome. (Matthew 27:61. Comp. Mark 15:40.) The fact that both here and in Matthew 27:56, she is called “the mother of Zebedee’s children,” rather than the wile of Zebedee, has led to the very probable conjecture that Zebedee had died since his two sons had left him in the fishing boat. (Mark 1:20.) This conjecture has also led to another, that the disciple who had asked leave to go and bury his lather (Matthew 8:21) was James or John, their father having died just previous to that time. worshiping him.—Worshiping in the sense of humble prostration before him, not in the sense of paying him divine honors. 21. What wilt thou?—She had asked, in indefinite terms, “a certain thing of him” (verse 20, comp. Mark 10:35), but he declines to answer until she states in specific terms what she desires. on thy right hand.—The place of highest honor in the courts of kings is at the right hand of the throne, and the next, at the left hand. Salome therefore desired to secure for her two sons the highest possible honors in the expected kingdom. 22. Ye know not.—Although the mother alone had spoken, Jesus treats the request as that of the two sons, by using the plural “ye,” and addressing his answer exclusively to them. The request was understood in the same way by the ten. (Verse 24.) They knew not what they were asking, because to sit on his right hand and on his left was far different from what they thought, and was to be obtained in a way of which they had no conception. the cup that I shall drink.—It was common in ancient times to execute criminals by compelling them to drink a cup of poison, and assassination and suicide were often effected by the same means. The cup, therefore, became a symbol of suffering and of death, and it is so used here. The words of this and the next verse that are in brackets are copied from Mark 10:38-39, where they will be considered. 23. Ye shall drink.—James drank the cup by suffering martyrdom at the hands of Herod Agrippa, being the first of the apostles to suffer death. (Acts 12:2.) John lived to an old age, outliving all of the other apostles, and died a natural death; but he drank the cup by the sufferings through which he passed. not mine to give.—The rendering should be, “not mine to give except to those for whom it is prepared by my Father.” (Alford.) It was his to give it, but only to those for whom it is prepared by the Father. 24. moved with indignation.—Nothing moves the indignation of men more than to know that one of a company of equals is plotting to get an undue advantage over the others. It was now necessary that Jesus should interfere as a peacemaker. 25-28. not be so among you.—To sit on his right hand and on his left in the kingdom would not only be an honor, but it would give authority. Jesus informs them that while the princes and the great among the Gentiles exercise dominion and authority, it is not to be so in his kingdom, but that the post of honor is to be the post of servitude. The one who would be great must be their minister (δικονος, domestic servant), and he who would be chief (πρτος, first), must be their slave (δολος). He enforces the lesson by his own example, in that he came not to have men serve him, but that he might serve them. In this way both the ambition of James and John, and the indignation of the others, were suppressed. It is impossible for preachers, teachers, and other workers in the Church, to study this lesson too carefully. The Blind Men at Jericho, Matthew 20:29-34. (Mark 10:46-52; Luke 18:35 to Luke 19:1)29. departed from Jericho.—Departed in the direction of Jerusalem; for they were then, as previously stated, “going up to Jerusalem.” (Verse 17.) Their arrival at Jericho is not mentioned, because the writer is not aiming to give an account of all that was done, but only of certain detached incidents. 30. thou Son of David.—On the meaning of this expression, and on the faith of blind men, see the notes, 9:27, 28. 31. the multitude rebuked them.—Their clamor appeared to the multitude indecorous, and it interrupted conversation; hence their desire to suppress it. The multitude were thinking of their own comfort and dignity instead of sympathizing with the unfortunate. 32, 33. stood still and called them.—To rebuke the indifference of the multitude, as well as to grant the petition of the blind men, Jesus showed, by stopping and calling them to him, that he had not been indifferent to their cries. They had cried only for mercy: he makes them tell in what way they desire him to manifest it, and then he grants their request. They needed Far more of his mercy than they called for; but, like men in general, they thought more of their bodily than of their spiritual ills. 34. they followed him.—Though they came not for spiritual comfort, the bodily blessing which they received attached their hearts to Jesus and led them in the direction of the blessings yet more to be desired.

Questions by E.M. Zerr For Matthew 201. To what man is the kingdom of heaven likened ? 2. He went out for what purpose? 3. At what hours did he go? 4. With which group did he specify the wages ? 5. State the agreement with the others. 6. What reason given for idleness of the last group ? 7. State the contract made with them. 8. When was the paying done? 9. Which was paid first? 10. Who received most wages? 11. Tell who complained. 12. Did they complain of shortage in wages? 13. To what spirit would you lay their complaint? 14. On what ground did the paymaster justify himself? 15. This all illustrated what reversal? 16. What people was first in God’ s service? 17. Who showed more readiness to serve him? 18. To what city were they next going? 19. On the way whom did Jesus call to one side? 20. What event did he inform them about? 21. How were the Gentiles to have a part in it ? 22. And why the priests and scribes? 23. What about the third day? 24. What woman came to Jesus at this time? 25. Name her sons. 26. State her request. 27. Why was it not granted ? 28. Instead, what were they to share with Jesus? 29. Hearing this caused what in the ten brethren? 30. Point out a cause for this. 31. To what people did Jesus refer for illustration? 32. With them what did the great men do? 33. But with whom was this not to be the case? 34. Who was to be servant? 35. And who was to be their minister ? 36. For what had the Son of man not come? 37. Instead, what would he give? 38. And he came to do what ? 39. From what city did they now depart? 40. Who followed them? 41. What objects of charity were passed? 42. For what did they first cry out? 43. What did they call Jesus? 44. Were they correct ? 45. How could Jesus be both? 46. Who rebuked them? 47. With what result? 48. Then what did Jesus first do? 49. State his question to them. 50. In answer, what title did they use? 51. State their request. 52. What kind of power would this require? 53. Could a son of David perform this? 54. Who could ? 55. Tell what Jesus then did. 56. How soon did the men see?

Matthew 20:1

20:1. Jesus was still talking to his disciples when he spoke the following parable. It was to illustrate the principle mentioned and commented upon in the last verse of the preceding chapter. The application of the parable will come in verse 16, but the whole story had to be told to bring out the point. A vineyard means usually a place where grapes are grown, but the word could be understood to denote any place where plants are cultivated. Early in the morning means the beginning of the day, for the next time he went out it was still only the third hour of the day.

Matthew 20:2

20:2 The penny was equivalent to about 17 cents in our money. The value of the wages is not important in the parable as it was spoken for another purpose.

Matthew 20:3

20:3 The householder found he needed more workers and went out about the third hour (9 A. ‘M. our time) and found others unemployed which indicates he had secured the first laborers in this place. Marketplace is from AGORA and it is defined in the lexicon of Thayer as follows: “In the New Testament the forum or public place,–where trials are held, and citizens resort, and commodities are exposed for sale.” It is easy to see why a man would go to such a place to hire workmen.

Matthew 20:4

20:4 No stipulated amount was stated but the laborers were promised whatever was right. They evidently agreed with the terms for it states they went their way.

Matthew 20:5

20:5 The householder went back for more men at noon and 3 P. M. and made the same bargain for it says and did likewise.

Matthew 20:6

20:6 The last time he went was about the eleventh hour which would correspond with our 5 P. M., an hour before quitting time at least, depending on what part of the eleventh hour it was when he hired them.

Matthew 20:7

20:7 He asked them why they were idle and they said that no man had offered them any work. That being a valid explanation, the house holder engaged them to work with the same promise he made the ones hired from the third hour and on through the day. The use that is made of the “eleventh hour” item is entirely off of the purpose of the parable, but because of the widespread idea existing concerning it, I think it will be well to give some notice to It. The error to which I refer is the doctrine that a person professing repentance on his deathbed should be compared to these men in the eleventh hour. There is no comparison for these men went to work as soon as they had an opportunity while the deathbed man had been offered work by the Gospel ever since he was of responsible age. Also, these men had whatever was left of the eleventh hour and all of the twelfth to work, while the deathbed man has let the whole day of life go by and he has no opportunity to work at all.

Matthew 20:8

20:8 There is no special rule in business that caused the paymaster to begin with the ones hired last. However, by telling the parable in that order Jesus brought out the idea of the lesson which is in verse 16. These men were last as to time and the chronology of events but they were first or foremost in receiving the Lord’s estimation.

Matthew 20:9

20:9 These “eleventh-hour” men did not know how much they were to receive, only that it was to be “whatever is right.” They made no complaint and hence showed a willingness to be fair and agreeable.

Matthew 20:10

0:10 They supposed expresses the basis on which most of the erroneous doctrines of men are formed. There is no scripture for the theories hence they rely on their own judgment and it is usually along the line of what they were wanting to begin with. These “early” laborers did not complain when the wage rate was stated, and neither was the paymaster cutting it short at the end of the day. But they were measuring themselves by others in the laboring group which is an unwise principle to act upon according to Paul in 2 Corinthians 10:12.

Matthew 20:11

0:11 They complained to the very man who made the bargain with them in the morning and with whom they found no fault when they hired to him.

Matthew 20:12

0:12 Made them equal with us was a false accusation. The householder was only carrying out his contract as he had done with them. The “eleventh-hour” men had gone to work at the first opportunity and the others had done no better than that. When they accepted the offer of employment they knew they would have to do a full day’s work which would extend through the hottest part of the work period.

Matthew 20:13

0:13 I do thee no wrong was a truthful statement for the householder was living up to his contract made at the time of employment.

Matthew 20:14

0:14 That thine is denotes that these men wanted more than was coming to them. When the paymaster put the penny into their hands he gave them all that was rightfully theirs. That means that had they obtained more than the penny they would have gone home with property that did not belong to them.

Matthew 20:15

0:15 This householder could have given his money to anyone he chose regardless of all others and been within his rights since it was his own. Eye evil because means they had an envious eye when they saw the good favor bestowed upon the others.

Matthew 20:16

2:14. See the comments at Matthew 20:16 for the explanation of this.

Matthew 20:17

0:17 The twelve disciples always means the twelve apostles.

Matthew 20:18

0:18 This is the second time that Jesus made this sad prediction (chapter 16:21). No reply was made by the apostles this time, the rebuke from Jesus to Peter on the other occasion evidently not being forgotten.

Matthew 20:19

0:19 The Jews could condemn a man to death but they did not have the authority to execute it (John 18:31). That is why they had to take their cases to the Roman or secular courts (here called the Gentiles) to get such a sentence carried out.

Matthew 20:20

0:20 In Mark 10:35 these brethren are identified simply as the sons of Zebedee as they would also be recognized to be in our verse. The reason for the seemingly unnecessary phrase mother of Zebedee’s children is that she spoke for her sons, whereas the account in Mark tells us only of their desire. The woman first worshiped Jesus before asking her favor. (See the long definition of “worship” at chapter 2:2.)

Matthew 20:21

0:21 Since Jesus knew what, was in man’s mind it was not necessary for him to ask this question for information. However, it is the will of the Lord for his creatures to show their confidence in Him by asking, although he knows what they need before they ask (see chapter 6:8). The woman’s request was based on the same erroneous idea of the kingdom of heaven that people generally had while Jesus was on earth. She thought it was to be in the nature of an earthly kingdom, and that the persons who were permitted to occupy seats nearest the king would have some special advantages.

Matthew 20:22

0:22 There was more than one reason for saying they did not know what they were asking for, one of them being their ignorance of what was in store for Jesus. But they thought they were prepared in mind to take whatever might come in their association with the king and doubtless they were sincere in their answer. While they had riot asked for that experience, Jesus asked them the question and got an affirmative reply.

Matthew 20:23

0:23 The cup and baptism are used figuratively and refer to the persecutions that were destined to come upon Christ and his followers. They indeed were to have that experience as Jesus informed them. Since Jesus was to be the king it would naturally fall to someone else to do the seating of him on the throne. That is why he said of it that it is not mine to give. However, he did say that the Father would give the honor to them for whom it is prepared.

Matthew 20:24

0:24 This conversation between Christ and the two brethren was heard by the ten other apostles. We are not told why they were indignant, but evidently it was because of the ambition of the two in wanting to be seated above the others in places of authority. Jesus had already told them (chapter 19:28) that all of them would have important positions in the kingdom which should have made them grateful and satisfied.

Matthew 20:25

0:25 It was necessary so often for the apostles to be corrected in their erroneous notion of the kingdom of heaven, because they thought of it in the same light as the governments of the world. Jesus reminded them that in such kingdoms a person who is great is the one who has the most authority, and such a man often uses that greatness to impose upon his fellow citizens.

Matthew 20:26

0:26 In the kingdom that Christ was going to set up, phases that would involve greatness and popularity were to be opposite those in worldly kingdoms; in the institution of Christ true greatness was to consist in service to others. Minister is from and one meaning of the word in the lexicon is “servant.”

Matthew 20:27

0:27 Servant is from a different word than minister in the preceding verse. It is a stronger term and is compared to a slave. Such a word was used because the apostles were so much in the dark as to the character of the coming kingdom that it took unusual language to get them to see the point.

Matthew 20:28

0:28 As a proof that the kingdom of Heaven was to be different from others, Jesus cited his own example of condescension. Although he was to be its king, he came among men as the greatest of servants, and crowned that service by giving his life.

Matthew 20:29

0:29 As a rule there were many people following Jesus as he went from place to place but they were not all going with the same motive. Some were sincerely seeking for more teaching, some were interested in his miraculous cure of their diseases, and others were following with selfish interests in the temporal favors (John 6:26).

Matthew 20:30

0:30 For the significance of .on of David see comments at Matthew 15:22.

Matthew 20:31

9. As to why they rebuked him, see the notes at Matthew 20:31.

Matthew 20:32

0:32 Jesus halted and asked the blind men what they wanted. He did not ask them to come in to him since they were blind and that would have been a hardship on them.

Matthew 20:33

0:33. A man’s eyesight is one of the most precious faculties he possesses, and it was the one thing that was uppermost in the minds of these unfortunates.

Matthew 20:34

0:34. When Jesus so willed it he made bodily contact with persons he wished to favor. These men showed their appreciation by joining the group following Jesus.