What does Matthew 21:30 mean?

Explanation

Matthew 21:30 is a part of the Parable of the Two Sons, which Jesus tells in response to a challenge to his authority by the religious leaders of the time.

In this particular verse, a father asks his second son to work in the vineyard.

The son initially agrees, saying "I go, sir," indicating readiness and respect.

However, despite his verbal commitment, he fails to follow through on his promise and does not go to work in the vineyard.

The literal meaning of the verse highlights a contrast between what the son says and what he actually does, emphasizing the inconsistency between his words and actions.

On a deeper level, the verse suggests a critique of those who profess obedience and loyalty with their lips but whose actions do not reflect their promises, demonstrating hypocrisy.

Historical Context

During the time of Jesus, vineyards were a common part of the agrarian economy in the Mediterranean region.

The parable would have easily resonated with Jesus' audience, who would be familiar with the pressures and responsibilities of family businesses like vineyards.

The interaction between father and sons reflects the patriarchal structure of the society and the expectations of filial duty and obedience.

The parable is set within a larger confrontation between Jesus and the Jewish religious authorities that began in Matthew 21:23.

Jesus uses parables as a way of teaching and making his point about spiritual truths and the kingdom of God, often directly addressing the attitudes and behaviors of his listeners.

Theological Insights

From a theological perspective, different commentators have interpreted the two sons as representing different groups.

Some suggest that the first son, who initially refuses but then does the father's will, symbolizes tax collectors and sinners who repent and follow Jesus.

The second son, who agrees to work but does not, could represent the religious leaders who say they obey God but do not practice what they preach.

The parable emphasizes the importance of repentance and true obedience to God's will, rather than mere lip service. It challenges formalistic or superficial religious observance and underscores that God values the transformation of the heart that leads to action.

Practical Applications

The teachings of this verse underscore the value of integrity, aligning one's actions with one's words.

It reminds us to follow through on our commitments, not just make empty promises.

In daily life, this could apply to personal relationships, professional responsibilities, and spiritual commitments.

The verse also serves as a call to self-examination, urging individuals to reflect on whether their actions truly reflect their professed values and beliefs, and to make necessary changes to rectify any discrepancies between the two.

Cross-References

• Matthew 21:28-31 (The larger context of the Parable of the Two Sons)
• James 1:22-23 (The importance of being doers of the word, not hearers only)
• Matthew 23:3 (A critique of religious leaders who do not practice what they preach)

Language Study

In the original Greek, the key phrase spoken by the second son is "ἐγώ, κύριε" (egō, kurie), where "ἐγώ" means "I" and "κύριε" is a form of "κύριος," meaning "sir" or "lord," showing respect or acknowledgement of authority.

The use of "κύριε" in this context emphasizes the outward show of respect and obedience.

The verb "go" in the original Greek is in the present tense ("ὑπάγω", hypagō), which can convey an immediate intent to go, but the narrative reveals that his intent was not followed by action.

Cultural and Religious Comparisons

In many religious and cultural traditions, parables or stories are used to impart wisdom and moral lessons.

Other ancient myths may demonstrate similar themes of the disparity between what one says and what one does, such as Aesop's fable "The Boy Who Cried Wolf," where the protagonist's actions belie his words.

Within Judaism, particularly in the prophetic literature, there is a recurring admonition against those who honor God with their lips while their hearts are far from Him (Isaiah 29:13), a theme which echoes strongly in this parable.

Scientific Perspectives

From a psychological standpoint, the dissonance between the second son's spoken commitment and his subsequent actions can be related to the concept of "cognitive dissonance." This is the mental discomfort experienced when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values or acts in a way that contradicts their beliefs or promises.

Understanding this parable might also involve the study of moral psychology, which delves into why individuals might not follow through with actions that they verbally commit to, exploring possible factors like social influences, moral reasoning, and individual personality traits.

Commentaries

Various experts have commented on this verse and its implications.

Many scholars, such as William Barclay, emphasize how the parable is targeted at religious leaders who are outwardly pious but inwardly disobedient. They see this verse as a stark reminder of the importance of actions over words.

Other theologians like John Calvin focus on the concept of grace and how the first son, despite his initial refusal, is the one who ultimately does the will of the father, illustrating the idea that it is not the righteous adherence to the law that saves, but rather the repentant spirit that leads to obedience.

Yet other commentaries may draw attention to the socio-political aspect of Jesus' teachings, such as the work of N.T. Wright, who often brings out how Jesus' parables carried both theological and contemporary socio-political messages for the original audience.