A Parable

Our friend, Rodney, from Australia, is a regular contributor to the blog.  He wrote a short article and has offered it to us.  So, here it is:

There was a certain king who had two adopted sons. They were the children of servants who had been tragically killed in the king’s service, so he had adopted them as his own.

The first appeared to be of quite average intelligence. There was nothing particularly distinguishable about him or his achievements, and he often seemed to lack initiative. He only did what he was asked – no more, and usually no less. He never did anything without first finding out exactly what was expected – how the king wanted it done and what was the expected result. Many people thought he was rather pedantic about following the “rules” and sometimes got rather annoyed with him, but that didn’t seem to bother him. He just kept plodding along, doing what was asked, no more and no less.

The other was a “go-getter”. He was extremely intelligent. He had initiative in spades and energy to burn. He was always on the go, doing things for his adoptive father, seemingly never satisfied that he had done enough to please the king. As for the rules, forget it. The king was old and rather set in his ways, in his opinion. Time had moved on, new ways to achieve results had been devised and the son knew much more about modern life and methods than the king. In other words, he knew best. Oh, sure, he sometimes did what the king asked, but he always did it his own way, and wasn’t afraid to take shortcuts if he thought it would save time or effort. He spent much of his time hanging around with scientists and scholars, discussing the latest developments and working out how he could use his new-found knowledge to his advantage, all in the name of serving the king, of course.

The king, meanwhile, was planning a major project. One that would impact the lives of every subject in the kingdom. He knew that it had to be done exactly right. He knew how it had to be done, and what the consequences would be if it wasn’t done exactly according to plan.

Which of the two sons would he be most likely to choose? The one who “knew best”, who would be likely to do things his own way and disregard the instructions of the king? Or the one who he knew would follow his instructions exactly, regardless of how silly or old-fashioned they seemed, trusting the kings judgment and realizing that the king gave those instructions for a reason, even if that reason wasn’t immediately obvious?

The same applies to the kingdom of God. Jesus told a very interesting parable in Luke 19;

12 He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return. 13 Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Engage in business until I come.’ 14 But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to reign over us.’ 15 When he returned, having received the kingdom, he ordered these servants to whom he had given the money to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by doing business. 16 The first came before him, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.’ 17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’ 18 And the second came, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made five minas.’ 19 And he said to him, ‘And you are to be over five cities.’ 20 Then another came, saying, ‘Lord, here is your mina, which I kept laid away in a handkerchief; 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man. You take what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 He said to him, ‘I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?’ 24 And he said to those who stood by, ‘Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ 25 And they said to him, ‘Lord, he has ten minas!’ 26 ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.’” (ESV)

In other parables we see that things of value are often associated with God’s torah (e.g. the parable of the lost coin). Let us for a moment apply that principle here. Each of the servants is given the Torah containing the master’s instructions. The first applied it (invested it) and bore fruit, which he presented back to his master at the master’s return. What was the master’s response?

17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’ (ESV)

The second servant did likewise, but maybe wasn’t quite so wise in his dealings. He bore less fruit, but fruit nevertheless, which again was presented to the maser. The master’s response was similar.

19 And he said to him, ‘And you are to be over five cities.’ (ESV)

The last servant did nothing with the gift. He kept it wrapped up (perhaps in a book on the shelf?) and gave it back to the master untouched. What was the master’s response to this?

22 He said to him, ‘I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow?

24 And he said to those who stood by, ‘Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’

26 ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. (ESV)

This brings to mind Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:

19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (ESV)

One last point needs to be made – the last servant still lived and was still a part of the kingdom, just without the same reward as the others. What happened to those who rejected the master’s rule outright?

27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.’” (ESV)

Obedience is not an issue of salvation. Rejecting the master completely is. God brought the children of Israel out of Egypt before He took them to the mountain. He asked them to enter into relationship with him before He gave the teachings and instructions for living (the Torah). Like the two servants of the king mentioned above, your obedience determines your usefulness to the King and directly influences how much you’ll be entrusted with.

In Romans 8 Paul talks about our adoption as sons. Adoption implies responsibility. When a child young and immature, he or she is not expected to know all of the rules of the household and mistakes are expected and understood, although corrected as part of the learning process; however, as the child matures, they’re expected to learn the rules and grow into obedience. The same applies to us. When we are first adopted as sons, we don’t know all the rules. We are expected however to study His Word, to learn to live as members of His household and to grow into obedience to His instructions. This is a process, not something that happens instantaneously. We all mature at different rates – some take longer than others. The important thing though is that we’re willing to learn and accept correction when we get it wrong.

The heart attitude is all important – God cannot use one who is unteachable or unrepentant. How much do we want to learn His ways? How useful do we want to be in His kingdom? How faithful will be be in the little things? How much can we be entrusted with?

Subscribe
Notify of
8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rodney

No problem – no offense taken :-).

Daniel

Rodney, your opening parable is creative and useful. Thanks for sharing it.

Before I start let me say that exploration of and return to the root of the faith has had profound impact on my life. So, I am a member of the choir.

Skip and Bob Gorelik have noted more than once that of the 613 mitzvot only a relatively small number of them apply to individuals today. This is based on their being no active Levitical priesthood, temple, gender related mitzvot, etc.

It seems to me that there is a goodly portion of those relatively small number about which there is no argument between evangelicals and those of us who are endeavoring to be lead back to the root. Exceptions to that statement can be made but in general, evangelicals take what is commonly called the New Testament and place it before themselves as the standard for how to live their lives. You and I know that Jesus, Paul, etc. were taking Torah and applying to people. Most evangelicals are ignorant of that and many may be sadly hostile to being taught that. But, ignorance and hostility do not change the fact that the NT is not new. It is God’s Torah. So, obedience to it and teaching of it, in so far as it is done accurately, does bear fruit and change lives. To put it another way: Devout evangelicals have their minas of Torah whether they know it or not. Those who invest their minas wisely produce a return for the one who has received His kingdom.

A problem with the author of something like you’ve written not directly and openly applying the writing for the reader is that the reader is left to make assumptions. My assumption is that you are describing followers of Jesus who are seen by others as rule bound and exacting as being those who adhere more closely to Torah and the root and the fast moving person is the rest of the church which has access to wealth. If I’m wrong please let me know who they represent.

When humans come out of something that was a deep part of their identity and move into a new identity they can become, as you describe it, pedantic. I would add “preachy.” We see this in people who lose a large amount of weight, stop smoking, become vegetarian, to name a few.

I want to direct you to Romans 2:28-29 to clarify my point. Christians who ignorantly and even hostilely deny the value of Torah, etc. BUT who practice a goodly portion of the mitzvot that still apply today produce wonderfully transformed lives in themselves and, if they are leaders of congregations, see the transformation of many many lives as well.

Yes, there is much ground to be covered in traditional Christianity in bringing a fuller and more completely authentic reproduction of the holy life to which believers are called. Again, I am in the baritone section of that choir.

Your writing is prophetic. It is a call to get on with that return to authenticity. I’m with you.

I am bringing to the fore that the flashy brother, in the application I am making and assuming, has serious issues but despite the issues sees wonderfully transformed lives and families. The gospel, the whole gospel, not just the “Jesus died for my sins” part, all of God’s Torah, is conspiratorial. Even for adopted brothers who are painfully wrong in some important areas are used by God to remake the world.

Thanks Rodney.

Michael

Hi Rodney,

On the downside, one could criticize Tony Robinson for “reducing” many different stories in the Bible to one theme.

But the efffect of Tony Robinson’s presentation, if one accepts his thesis, is very clear and powerful.

In your parable, you seem to take an approach that is almost the opposite of Tony Robinson.

You take one parable and compare it to another parable and then to a story, and we end up with multiple and possibly contradictory themes.

In the process, I think you create a lot of work for your reader.

In the first place, the meaning of Luke 19 is not straightforward to me and I don’t think you explain it.

But I think Luke 19 is about how we must do something with whatever God gives us and that we should never never take sides against God the Father.

I don’t think Luke 19 is about getting the job requirements right, salvation, commandments, or obedience.

In any case, I think that the task you set for yourself is too complicated and difficult.

My 2 cents.

carl roberts

From A-Z, I’ve seen it and you have seen it. All the animals in the zoo. Noah had quite a caucophony of creatures to deal with, didn’t he?
I really like what a very good friend of mine said to me recently. She said- we come from a dysfunctional family, but we put the “fun” in dysfunctional! I like that lady (alot). She (to me) is the real deal. And to be able to speak at her husbands funeral this past Monday, clearly and lucidly as she did after he had put a gun to his head (to escape from bondage of alcohol) was to me an absolute amazement. This girl has some strength coming from somewhere. (It’s a G-d thing!). Not very “religiously correct” (twin brother to “politically correct”), but this one thing I’m knowin’ – y’all, G-d did that!
Truly, as the sayin’ goes.. “it takes all kinds!” It does! Better get used to it brother- G-d loves diversity! He is a G-d of unity and a G-d of delightful diversity. I’m so glad for twenty eight flavors at Baskin Robbins- (aren’t you?).
Yeah.. that’s right.. “other sheep have I which are not of this fold” are His very words. (By the way- you’re not from around here- are you?) lol!! “I was a stranger and you took me in” Hallelujah!
Let me throw some carrots into this “stone soup!” “Salvation” (deliverance) is offered “to the Jew first” and also to the Greek.” I didn’t say it- He did. (Romans 1.16) Yeah.. here we go again.. “not either/or – both” For “all” have sinned and come short of the glory of G-d. (romans 3.23)
Now I don’t claim to be a wordsmith, but where I come from- “all” usually means “all.” – No problemo. “Todo”/all. W’ere in this thing- together. We (we) together compose the body (and bride) of Christ. Take a good look at your own family unit. Go ahead.. I’ll wait..(what a strange lookin’ bunch.) lol!
Granpa’s, grandma’s, cousins, nieces and uncles- all related yet all unique. I was telling my son just yesterday- “remember”- you are unique! (just like everyone else!). Together, we comprise the body of Christ.
We do need to focus on the main thing though- and that is this. If “any man” be “in Christ.” Either we is or we ain’t. Either you is a sheep or you is a goat! (Did he just call me a goat?- lol!) When it comes to our relationship with Him- either you “is” or you “ain’t.” Your either “in” or your “out”. No mugwomps, please. (they got their “mug” on one side of the fence, and their “womp” on the other).
Is G-d’s “Torah” relevant today? (Would somebody please -just slap me.) I really hate to yet have to ask- “are you smarter than a fifth grader?” (Oh.. so now he’s dissin’ my intelligence!). -“Back off bubba!” lol!!
If I were to take that same fifth grade intelligence and apply it to this verse- “every word of G-d is pure”, could I then assume that by “every word” He meant “every word?” lol! (I’m havin’ too much fun with this!). Or how bout this line- (one of my personal faves) – “did G-d say that?” well.. let me think on that.. er.. “it is written!” Does that even make a difference? Whose book is this, people??
I got that Romans 2:28-29 feelin’, bubblin’ up in me right now.. I believe the word is “Oy!” lol!

Fred

Sorry Michael, but I think Luke 19 (Oh Luke – you’re the man!) IS about salvation; more specifically, about what one does with what God is offering.

First, we have Zakkai, who has more money than righteousness (and honesty). He does have curiosity though, enough to shimmy up a fig tree in order to get a glimpse of the One causing all the commotion. Yeshua doesn’t ask if He could stay at his house, He matter-of-factly tells him He is staying at his house, “Hurry! Come down, because I HAVE to stay at your house today” (v.5b). Zakkai, no doubt still curious and perhaps thinking that by having this good rabbi in his house will elevate his stature in the community, “…welcomed Yeshua joyfully.” In addition, look what happens to our mean old tax collector: he is so changed that he not only repents fully, but also voluntarily makes the whole restitution required by the Torah for such acts. Then look what brother Luke writes in verse nine, “salvation” (Hebrew, jeshu’ah the feminine form of Yeshua’s own name) Yeshua/salvation has literally “come to this house.” There is wordplay.

Next, we have the parable about the king and his servants; what they do or not do with what he gives them.

Finally, what really spells out this chapter for me is what my man Luke writes in the last part of verse 44. As they approach Yerushalayim and Yeshua tearfully begins to lament over the city and its coming demise, He tells His talmidim that all this coming destruction (in reality, THE LOSS) is “…all because you did not recognize your opportunity when God offered it!” (JNT)

As Dr. Skip says in his Hebrew perspective on prayer, Lord prepare our hearts for what You have to offer us.

Michael

“Today salvation has come to this house, because this man too is a son of Abraham; for the Son of Man has come to seek out and save what was lost.”
Luke 19:10

Hi Fred,

Thanks! I understand. I was actually thinking of Luke 19:11-27 (Parable of the Pounds) and not Luke as a whole.

And thank you Rodney; your points made my day!

Rodney

Thanks for the honest feedback, folks. All good comments, which I’ve taken on board and am considering. More in depth responses pending (just didn’t want anyone to think their comments are being ignored).

Blessings,
Rodney.