The Jews had a treasure, given to them by God, over which they should have been stewards so that they would have readily received the Messiah when He came.  Instead, they ignored the treasure and were held accountable for it.

Growing up in church, I heard this parable preached often. There were good applications made from the text such as the fact that there will be accountability one day for what God has entrusted to us, and that God only expects us to work with what He has given us. All of these are applications made to Church Age Christians about faithful stewardship. But deeper study of the parable makes me wonder if that is the point that Jesus was intended to make when He used this literary device.

How does the context impact the primary application?

Jesus is speaking to the Jews in the story. The intended audience of the Book of Matthew is the Jews. This story is part of a set of three parables—all with similar scenarios. The arrangement and construction of the parables indicate all three parables are intended to be seen together and drive home a main point, or at least closely related points.

If the parable is intended for believers and about stewardship, how are we to interpret the punishment for the unprofitable steward in Matthew 25:29-30?

For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

The consequence described in these verses is eternal punishment of an unbeliever, not an unfaithful believer. Jesus chose these words specifically. He intended to communicate damnation as the punishment for the unprofitable steward. Unless we choose to adopt a salvation by profitability doctrine, which would conflict with a host of other scriptures, there must be more to what Jesus is saying here.

How do we explain the differences between the parable of Matthew 25 and the similar parable recorded in Luke 19:11-27?

Let’s seek to answer the questions in reverse order. Jesus told variations of this parable on more than one occasion—perhaps many occasions. The parable of the Ten Minas differs from the parable of the Talents in a number of ways. They were spoken at different locations and different times. In Luke, Jesus is in Jericho teaching, just after the conversion of Zaccheus. In Matthew, Jesus is in Jerusalem teaching the crowd during the final week before the crucifixion. In the Luke passage, the servants were given minas. A mina was an amount of money roughly equivalent to about three month’s wages for a field laborer. In Matthew 25, the servants are given talents. The talent was also an amount of money, but worth somewhere around 20 years wages for a field laborer. Jesus changed key elements of the story, maybe because of the difference between the countryside people in His audience in Jericho vs the fabulously wealthy religious and national leaders living in Jerusalem.

The similarities are clear though. There are three servants. All three are given a treasure. The master expects them to do something with that treasure. Those that did well were rewarded and the unprofitable servant who did nothing with the treasure was punished.

The most shocking aspect of the Luke parable is the similar climax to the Matthew 25 parable.

“For I say to you, that to everyone who has will be given; and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me” (Luke 19:26-27).

In both passages, the line of preaching concerns the rejection of the Messiah, and the consequence of being unprofitable with the treasure is death, even eternal death.

Let’s consider the context of the Matthew 25 parable.

Jesus has been excoriating the religious leadership of Jerusalem for their hypocrisy and their rejection of the Messiah (Matthew 23). He then talks about the judgment that will come upon Jerusalem, and the future judgment that will be associated with the events surrounding His eventual Second Coming. Now in Matthew 24:45-25:30, He tells three parables intended to drive home application regarding the Jews and the rejection of the Messiah.

Read More