Parables Based On History
For his illustrations, Jesus used all kinds of material, and on several occasions he used historical happenings which were well-known to his hearers.
When Herod the Great died (and this would be something like 30 years before Jesus began to preach) he left his domains to be divided amongst his sons, and one portion was left to Archelaus. To consolidate his position, Archelaus immediately hurried off to Rome so as to have his position confirmed by the Emperor, who was Octavianus Augustus Caesar. Before he went, he arranged for his servants to conduct his affairs in his absence.
When he had left for Rome, his citizens sent a message to Caesar that they were not prepared to have Archelaus to reign over them. Despite this protest, Caesar confirmed the kingdom to Archelaus, and on his return, he gathered to him those whom he had left to manage his affairs, and investigated how they had conducted themselves in his absence. He rewarded the diligent and rebuked the slothful, and then collected those who were not prepared to have him as king, and he dealt with them as one expects a son of Herod the Great would do.
All this formed excellent material for a most telling parable, told on different occasions with slight variations, the principal ones being the Parable of the Talents and the Parable of the Pounds.
The Parable Of The Talents
This is the middle one of the three parables given in Matt. 25. It commences, “Now the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man travelling into a far country…” The Greek word translated ‘kingdom’ can equally well be translated `king’ and often this correction adds much to the force and clarity of the statement. So it is here.
Jesus is the king, and 40 days after his resurrection he went to that far country (how far we do not know), even into heaven itself to be seated with his Father in his Father’s throne. The “servants” were his disciples, and before leaving them Jesus commissioned them to go worldwide in their preaching of the gospel.
Originally the “talent” was a coin valued at 187.10 before the First World War. It would be difficult to estimate its present-day value. It can, however, be used to represent any ability one may have — wisdom, judgement, intelligence, capacity for work, persistence, faithfulness, loyalty, eloquence, good memory, ability for teaching, etc.
Some possess one only, but others possess several, but whether few or many, they have to be used in the Master’s service. In the parable the talents were distributed to the servants “each according to his ability”.
Jesus does not expect five-talent results from a one-talent man, but he does expect that one-talent man to use what he has, of whatever form it takes. In the parable the one-talent man buried his talent and made no effort to increase it: he was slothful and did nothing.
After “a long time” the “man” returned. While Jesus thus warned his disciples, none expected the “long time” to be nearly 2,000 years, but from all the signs it would appear that the “long time” is almost over, and the “man” is about to return, when he will gather his “servants” together to hear of their success or otherwise.
In this parable we are not told how many servants there were, but the majority appear to have doubled their “talents”. And is it not so, at any rate, in ecclesial life? A man may feel that possibly he could do presiding duties for Sunday services — and he tries and succeeds. Very often when we see that man a few years later, he is serving the platform not only in his own ecclesia, but in outside ecclesias also.
Talleyrand used to have a saying, “Nothing succeeds like success”, and so it is. There are many doing effective “speaking” duties who originally thought they had no capacity for such at all. Not only so, more than one case could be quoted where this ability they have developed has stood them in very good stead in their daily occupation (although this must NOT be the motive in cultivating it!).
Such efforts (and let it be emphasised that such platform work is a minority of ecclesial duties, and if it should become an end in itself then, to quote the Lord, “He has his reward”!) will receive the commendation of the Master, “Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your Master”. It is difficult to imagine the great joy such a verdict will give.
On the other hand, what of the slothful one? In the parable he tried to shelter behind the reputed hardness of his Lord — a hard man, reaping where he had not sown, gathering where he had not winnowed. He professed fear and went and hid the talent in the ground, and then he gave back to his Lord the unused talent.
And what said the Lord to all these denunciations? “You wicked and slothful servant. You knew that I reap where I have not sowed, and gather where I have not winnowed? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest.”
Who could these “bankers” be, and what would constitute the “interest”? The “bank” could be the ecclesia as a whole, and the “interest” be the growth that follows the workings of the majority of ordinary ecclesias. Often this is by the hard work put in outside the ecclesia by the various members in their special activities.
Then came the condemnation and rejection. “Take the talent from him, and give to him that hath ten talents. To everyone who has will more be given, but from him who has not even what he has will be taken away.”
Had the one-talent man been faithful, he would have been given some position in the master’s “joy”, whereas now he has forfeited that, and what could have been his, will be added to the portion of the harder worker. “Cast the worthless one into outer darkness. There men will weep and gnash their teeth.” Possibly their mortal life will be allowed to continue, and they will see what they have forfeited by their slothfulness. They have forfeited their prospect of eternal life, and their Lord’s verdict confirms it — and like the rebellious citizens, their anguish will be great indeed, but for it they have only themselves to blame.
Those hearers who had “ears to hear” would appreciate the force of the Lord’s parable in part, even if they could not grasp the whole of it.
The Parable Of The Pounds
In Luke 19:12-27, we have this parable, which was given “because he was nigh unto Jerusalem, and because they thought the Kingdom (King) of God should immediately appear”. While this parable has close similarities to that of the Talents, there are also considerable differences.
It is a nobleman who is the subject of it, and he is going into a far country in order to receive a kingdom and to return. We can at once see that Jesus is the nobleman. “He called his ten servants and delivered unto them ten pounds”. The historical basis of the parable is the same as the parable of the Talents in Matt. 25. In this parable the number of the servants is given — 10 — and the total number of pounds — one pound to each servant.
It is in this parable that Jesus included the sending of the embassy to Rome, refusing to have “this man to reign over us”. “When he returned, having received the kingly power, he commanded these servants to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by trading” (R.S.V.).
The first one had gained 10 pounds, so that he could hand back to his Lord 11 pounds. He was given the commendation, “Well done, good servant. Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over 10 cities”. Here is promised direct participation in the government of the re-established Kingdom of God, with Jesus as King. A very material reward in a very material Kingdom!
The success of the second was not as great as the first one, although it was very considerable. He had gained five pounds, and like the first, he was given authority over cities, five in his case.
Then, right at the tail end came the slothful one, and he complained in very similar words to his opposite number in the parable of the Talents, and the Lord’s condemnation was also similar. Then the Lord came to deal with the rebellious ones those who knew their Lord’s will, but were not prepared to comply with it. “Bring hither and slay them before me.”
Both God and His Son are longsuffering and of tender mercy, but even their forbearance has a limit. In Psalm 2 the rebels are exhorted to “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry… when his wrath is kindled but a little”. In the former days of the Kingdom of God, forgiveness was repeatedly extended to the rebels, but there, too, a limit was reached, and God’s judgement descended upon Israel. If any state is to be conducted on right lines then the state has, in the ultimate, to have the power of life and death. This is manifested only too clearly at the present time in those countries which have abolished capital punishment and corporal punishment, with the result that violence and hooliganism and terrorism have gained the upper hand.
God will not tolerate rebellion against His Law, and the rebels, finally, have to be liquidated. So it is in the parable, the rebels have to be dealt with. “Kiss the Son, or… “
Activities Of Pilate And Herod
Pilate had commenced to build a tower, and through lack of funds, was unable to finish it, and it became a standing witness of the folly of commencing a project without being sure of the ability to bring it to a successful conclusion. All the people knew of this witness to folly, and Jesus based his parable on it as recorded in Luke 14:28-30, which reads “… For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.”
Jesus then followed this up with another parable, apparently teaching the same lesson but with a very subtle difference. Herod had become enamoured with his brother Philip’s wife. This was a grave affront to his first wife, who was the daughter of the King of Petrae, and her father immediately set about avenging the insult to his daughter, and also to himself. He had numerous resources, and out of them he collected an army of 20,000 men.
Herod was nothing like so well placed, and using all his resources, he could only collect 10,000 — an altogether inadequate force to meet that of his father-in-law. He had to make a very ignominious surrender. Added to this, John the Baptist had told him, in the plainest of terms, “it is not lawful for thee to have her” (and Herod was a rebel against the revealed will of God), thereby earning the undying enmity of Herodias — “the woman in the case”.
It was on these circumstances — of very recent happenings — that Jesus based the parable recorded in Luke 14:31-32, which reads, ” Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage and desireth conditions of peace”.
Wherein do these two parables differ from each other? They both emphasise the necessity of counting the cost before embarking upon an enterprise. True, but the desired ends are different. The “tower” parable is an exhortation to be sure of the ability to finish a good work of building that was represented by the tower. In the “king” parable, the end desired was that of the successful triumph of evil in the spirit of rebellion, and not the final emergence of good.
When we get to know the gospel we also realise our responsibility to God. We know what he requires, but are we prepared to give it him? Both parables are given in connection with what Jesus says in Luke 14:27, “And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple” and Luke 14:33, “So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple”. The two parables come between these two verses.
A big renunciation is required and the parable of the tower gives the price of acceptance, but the parable of the king gives the price of rejection. It is at our peril that we reject God and His requirements, for there is no hope whatsoever of being successful. The forces we are up against are altogether too powerful, in fact, they are limitless!
As we progress in our knowledge of the truth, there comes a point of no return, and the only decision to make is that of submitting ourselves to the Lord, aware of his abundant mercy, and acting accordingly.
These two parables are very small ones, but with very large implications which affect not only this life, but more important, that which is to come.
Daniel The Prophet – (Part 3)