Matthew 20:1-16

This passage occurs in both the Revised Common Lectionary and the Narrative Lectionary (most recently September 2026).

Summary:   Tough parable for us.  Most churches preach grace, but when exposed like this, grace just seems, well, unfair!  But grace it is.  And grace abounds.  I find grace in that God goes after the lazy (αργος); furthermore, even the envious (πονηρος, evil in fact) get into heaven.  We do not enter God's Kingdom based on our heart being perfect, but simply by God's grace.  I also find grace to be the hiring, not the pay-day; It is all by God's grace that we are hired in the first place and get to belong to God, to work in his vineyard.  I love that grace is so irresistible that even the grumpy don't get kicked out of God's vineyard!

Key words
απεστειλεν (aorist form of αποστελλω, apostello, meaning "send"; 20.2).  John's Gospel get a lot of publicity for the idea of sending (even within the Trinity), but Matthew uses the word αποστελλω 22 times! (Mark 20; Luke 25; John 27).  Here they are even sent into the...

αμπελων(α) (ampelon, meaning "vineyard"; 20:1,2,4 and 7).  First, it is interesting that Matthew and John have such a strong connection here, with vineyard and sending.  Another comparison worth exploring is between the parables in chapter 20 and 21, both about vineyards.

αργος (argos, meaning idle; 20.6)  I have no unique insights to add to this word.  I just want to point out:  God goes after the lazy, those not fit for work elsewhere, those who simply stand around.

αποδος (from αποδιδημι. meaning "pay/give back"; 20:8)  Matthew uses this word quite frequently in his Gospel:
Matthew 6:4  Give in secret, your father will reward/pay/give back in secret (see also 6:6, 6:18)
Matthew 12:36  On judgement day, we will have to "give back" an account of our life (see also 16.27)
Matthew 18 and the parable of the unforgiving servant -- lots of pay back in this story!
Matthew 22:21  Give/render to Caesar what is Caesar.
Matthew 27:58  Pilate gives the dead body back.
In the case of Matthew 20, the workers are paid/rendered/given back their wages.  The question is:  

However...

καυσων(α) (causon, like caustic in English; 20:12)  It is worth reminding ourselves that doing Christ's work is not always easy.  I wonder if the Gospel for this passage is found way back in Matthew 11:  Come to me, all your who are heavy laden..."

The easier read of this parable is this:  We can view our life of discipleship on earth as a wearying task for which we are rewarded.  Jesus reminds those of us that came to salvation earlier in life not to look down on those who didn't get around to "getting saved" until the end.

This is tough though, because as long as we view salvation as pay, there is likely little joy along the way and much frustration about the salvation state of our piers.  Furthermore this parable down plays the idea of relationship with the master

Is there another read?  What if we viewed it like this.  The master is actually called the master of the house (οἰκοδεσπότης).  What if we understood him as inviting people into his house.  Not as paid laborer but as one entrusted with work in the vineyard.  Only those who saw this as a contact were disappointed.  Everyone else simply trusted the master to provide for them -- they understood they were being invited into a relationship that moved beyond simply the exchange of work for money.  In this way, moving to the vineyard is moving into the family.  And again, only those who wanted it to be a contract were unhappy.

δίκαιος (just, 20:4)  What is telling is that the master of the house tells the people he will give them "just" or a "righteous" reward, never specifying what it is.  Maybe simply the dignity of work was also their pay.

τοις εμοις (dative with "the of me"; 20:15)  The Greek here is challenging to translate into good English, but the English reader can make sense of it.  When you have the word "the" without a noun it means more like "things", in this case, "the 'the' of me" or "the 'things' of me."  On the one hand, God could be referring to his property and money; but since the master of the house is God, one must wonder if the things of God are the people. 

πονηρος ("wicked" or "envious"; 20:15)  Even the wicked still get into the vineyard!!  God is really gracious.

ισους (isous, from isos, meaning the same, as in "iso-metric"; 20:15)  The problem (for some of the workers) is that the master is making people equal to each other.  This should call to mind Philippians, in that Jesus did not regard equality (same word) as something to be exploited, but humbled himself.  In this case, becoming like Christ is being willing to work in the vineyard and to rejoice over a repentant sinner instead of being frustrated they get the same "reward" as us!

Last bonus:  The evil eye in 20:15
The literal translation of 20:15 is "Or is your eye evil because I am good."  God does not describe himself as generous but as good. Ultimately goodness is tied into generosity.  Furthermore, those disgruntled are described as having an evil eye.  A reminder that a reward is given to those with jealousy and evil in their hearts, not just those pure in heart.  God is good.  He gives to humans. Regardless of how long they worked; regardless of how lazy they are; regardless of how good they are.

Matthew 18:21-35

This passage occurs in the RCL "Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently September 2026. 
 
Summary:  A classic tale of forgiveness.  A man owes an absurd amount (Roughly 6 billion by my calculations).  After being forgiven he arrests his friend who owes him a couple thousand dollars.  I would like to put it in terms of relationship.  The man has misunderstood his relationship to God (as being a recipient of mercy) and his relationship to other humans (co-recipients and fellow-sharers of mercy).  This causes him to further sin.  Jesus warns us of dire consequences when we fail to understand the true nature of our relationship with God and with others.

I suggest this is Matthew's version of the prodigal God and prodigal son, except the younger son became the older son.

Show me the money

μυριων ταλεντων ("ten thousand talents", 18.24)  A talent is roughly 5,000 to 6,000 denarii.  This means that 10,000 talents is like 500,000 denarii.  A denarii is a roughly a day's wages.  @120/day this is about 6 billion!  (Or almost 2,000 years of labor).  In comparison the hundred denarii would be about $25,000.  That is quite a difference.

Theologically significant words

σπλαγχνισθεις (form of σπλαγχνιζομαι, meaning "compassion", 18.27)  The master has compassion on the slave.  This is also the word that describes the father's heart toward the son in the prodigal son.  That a father would have this kind of compassion for his son is not the most shocking; however, in this case, the master has compassion on his servant.  This kind of compassion and forgiveness suggests to me that the master is grafting this slave into the family, although the slave doesn't realize it.

αφηκεν (from αφιημι) and απελυσεν (from απολυω)  Both of these verbs, which appear throughout the story, are related.  The first means "forgive" or "let go"; the second means "set free."  It is interesting that even though the slave's debt was freed, the relationship status did not change.  To what extent was he freed?   It is an interesting parable in that the masters work of forgiving and setting free does not change the heart of the person.  Tough to ponder.  When we view (and even experience) the relationship between us and God as a transaction and not an opportunity for transformation we always go awry.  

ελεησαι (from ελεεω, meaning show mercy, 18.33)  God does not simply possess mercy, but actively shows mercy.  Mercy is rarely an adjective (merciful), sometimes a noun (mercy) but most likely a verb with God as the subject: "show mercy."

ὀφειλέτης (debts, 18:25

Likely lost in translation:

ειπεν vs λεγει (18:21)  Both of these are different tenses of the same verb.  ειπεν is aorist; λεγει is present.  The aorist usually connotes a single action whereas the present suggests an on-going action.  Peter asks one time: "How often..." but Jesus repeatedly says, "7*70".  Jesus needed to repeat himself for this to be heard.

"will sin" vs "would sin" (Future vs. Subjunctive:  Sins aren't subjunctive in this case!)  

The Greek language is obsessed with the future.  There are multiple ways to show the future implications of a given action.  Worth noting is that there is no future subjunctive.  Either something will happen in the future or it might happen starting from this moment forward in an unknown time.  But you cannot do "might happen in the future"; that simply means might happen.  Today, when Peter is asking Jesus about forgiving others, he does not put the verb αφησω (forgive) in the subjunctive.  The whole sentence is in the future.  In short, Peter expects sin and forgiveness. The sentence literally reads: "How often will my brother sin against me and will I forgive him? Until seven times?"

ει τι ("whatever" 18.28)  The exact construction of the phrase "Pay what you owe me" is rather interesting. It actually includes an "ει τι" phrase. This phrase is normally translated "if anything," as if to say, the man was not even really sure what the debt was, if in fact, it was anything.

συνδουλος ("fellow-slave" 18:28, 29, 31, and 33)  The Greek can put "fellow" and "slave" together in one word.  Powerful word.  Fellow slave.  Do we view each other as fellow slaves to sin!  Do we view each other as fellow servants of the Gospel?  Paul will call others this term in Colossians.

βασανισταις (-στης, meaning "jailer" or "torturer", 18.34)  This is a hard word.  I don't like the idea of one being tortured.  On the one hand, the word means "jailer" so perhaps Jesus is simply referring to the act of the imprisonment.  The other way to think about this is that the word torture in Greek comes from the word test.  Perhaps this slave is put up to another time of testing, this time hopefully to succeed.  The word comes from a rag that was used to test whether gold was real.  The person needs to go and discover what he really is - a sinner yet a child of God!

δανειον  ("debt"; 18.27) The use of this word for "debt" here is unique in the NT.  The word normally carries with it a suggestion of interest, even usury with this debt.  Most simply it means a loan.  God is calling the loan and then forgives it.  What has God loaned you!?  It is interesting that in this parable, like the other classic parable of talents, the talents are loaned. never earned.  

παρακαλεω ("encourage"/"plead"; 18.29, 32)  The word for Holy Spirit is derived from this word:  "paraclete".  I want to connect Holy Spirit, pleading and forgiveness, but I can't quite sew this thread together.  Anyway, putting it here for someone else to run with it!

Matthew 18:15-20

This passage occurs as a New Testament Lesson in the RCL "Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently September 2023 . 
 
Summary:  Jesus seems to let us off the hook today, telling us we can treat sinning Christians like gentiles and tax collectors, as long as we've gone through the appeal court system.  However, this is the worst news of all, because Jesus spends most of his time eating with tax collectors and even getting harassed for his association with them.  In other words, Jesus doesn't give us permission to drop them, but rather instructs us to bear them, teach them and even get persecuted because we continue to care for them over and against their difficulties toward us.  Yes, he does let us remove our heart strings a bit from them, but not our moral obligation.  Hence why Jesus has to promise us his presence in the midst of conflict!

Note:  I wrote a post in which I specifically look at "binding" of sins and what this might mean.

Key Words:
αδελφος (brother/sister; found throughout section)  Earlier in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus refers to his followers as his brothers and sisters (12:49).  He is telling his disciples that in the church they are also brothers and sisters to one another.  

εκερδησας (from κερδαινω, "to gain", 18:15)  Jesus puts it beautifully:  If he listens to you, you have gained back your brother.  It is not about winning people to your side, but restoring the relationship!  

Additional 2023 note:  That this passage occurs after the story of the (Good) shepherd finding the lost sheep might be lost on the normal preacher, because the lectionary leaves that story for the year of Luke.  Dr Rolf Jacobson offers a nice connection between the two stories.  He argues, correctly I believe, that the latter story reveals this story is about Jesus working to reconnect the lost to the flock.  

Additional 2026 note:  It is also interesting that the previous week's Gospel reading had Jesus reflect on "what profit" is it for a man to "gain" (κερδαινω) the world, but lose his soul.  Here Jesus reflects on gaining a friend back.

ακουω & παρακουω ("listen" and "listen aside", 18:15, 16 and 17)  Jesus does not say "if he apologizes" or "if he agrees"; he simply says, "if he listens."  If we can listen to each other, we make room for reconciliation.  In fact, in order to get the point of agreement (vs 19), we must first reestablish the relationship (vs. 15).  

Jesus introduces a word that is rare in the New Testament: παρακουω.  That ακουω is part of it should be readily clear.  What is added is the preposition/prefix:  παρα.  This means alongside of.  So this verb means "to hear aside", i.e. not hear directly, not focus, not pay attention.  Definitely an indictment of our culture today!

εθνικος (pagan, gentile, literally "ethnic"; 18:17)  Jesus suggests we treat Christians who have greatly sinned against us as gentiles.  Interestingly, Jesus final words in the Gospel of Matthew instruct us to preach to the gentiles (all the nations of the world; same root word) and earlier Jesus reminds us to love our enemies.  Jesus is not giving us permission to be rude and dismissive to our brothers and sisters in Jesus, even those whom we are angry with.

τελωνης ("tax collector"; 18:17)  Jesus eats with tax collectors.  He repeatedly takes heat for being seen with them.  So considering someone a tax collector means something more like this:  "Treat them in such a way that no one knows how much they anger and embarrass you, bearing your cross and thanking God for this opportunity to become a more patient and compassionate person."

δησητε (form of δεω, meaning "bind"; 18:18)  Bind does not mean declare forgiven.  (In another post, I explore the historical meanings of this word within the context of "The Keys").   In short, ways to look at this:

1)  It means to forgive, understood in connection with Matthew 16 and John 20 as the priestly office of the keys

2)  It means to declare something taboo.  Marriage is a binding of two people together, which means that certain actions are permitted, but also that certain actions are no longer permitted.  This is interesting that in order for their to be life together, there has to be an established set of norms.

3)  I offer it means to bind sins to Christ.

συμφωνησωσιν ("agree" or "match", from συμφωνεω; 18:19)  The actually meaning of this word is not that interesting.  What is interesting is the derivation, "symphony" which means "together-sounds."  Jesus says that if we make a symphony, God listens.  Haha!  Also worth noting that this coming together takes place within a story about renewing of relationships and returning of lost sheep to the fold.  This is NOT then, simply two people coming together, but two people who were previously at odds.

επι της γης ("upon the earth", 18:19)  I want to point out something in the Greek overlooked in most translations -- Jesus says that if two or three on the earth agree, God in heaven will act.  This would suggest that people coming together is bridge between heaven and earth.  Reconciliation is a thin space, so speak.  The God in heaven responds to people on earth, when we find unity.  While this sounds like we are the agents of reconciliation, remember the context: the shepherd finding the lost sheep.

This passage also underscores a fundamental theme in the Bible:  Humans are estranged from each other.

συνηγμενοι ("gathered"; passive perfect participle from "συναγω"; 18:20)  This participle covers up a familiar word:  synago, from which we get synagogue.  The voice is significant here.  We do not gather ourselves in the church, but rather are gathered God.  Thus, we are moving  from human action to God's promise. Also worth noting that Jesus promises his presence in the midst of the office of the keys and congregational conflict.  The church is a gift, however human and sinful it can be!

εν μεσω ("in the midst", 18:20)  Matthew begins his Gospel by declaring Jesus to be Immanuel -- God with us.  Matthew ends his Gospel with Jesus declaring he is God with us.  In the middle of the Gospel Jesus affirms this as his mission (and identity) when he declares that, at the crossroads of worship and conflict, he is with us.

Translation Issue:  Hypothetical situations with εαν

Technically, this word is a combination of:  ει αν, both of which are "subjunctive" markers.  Put them together and you have a very hypothetical situation.  If you have the word εαν, the writer/speaker is not specifying if this will actually happen.  It means something like, "if" or perhaps "whenever."  If is used in Greek to set up a simple phrase (so necessary for science), if-then.  So in our text for this week, Jesus is not promising conflict; nor is he promising that people will not listen.  He is simply saying, "If you experience this, well, then do this..."

Also worth noting:  Every other verse in this section has an "if" clause, yet in 18:20 Jesus simply declares -- Where two or three are gathered, I am in the midst of you.

Binding of Sins (Matthew 18:15-20)

Note:  This post comes out of my 2023 sermon on Matthew 18:15-20.  I will focus on the word "bind."  However, you can access my post on Matthew 18:15-20 or John 20:19-31.

I want to reflect a bit more on what Jesus means when he says "Truly I tell you, whatever you BIND on earth will be BOUND in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."  I offer that this word "bind" (δεω) might have three meanings.

• Classic medieval: The binding, along with the loosing, refers to the keys of heaven which are given to the church (see Matthew 16:19).  These keys of loosing and binding will open and close the door.  As the church chooses to absolve or not absolve sins, people are moved in or blocked from heaven.
• Rabbinic:  A movement has picked up in recent scholarship to view the "binding" and "loosing" referring to the Rabbinic practice of determining, within a community, what was "bound", that is "sinful" and what was "loose", that is ''permitted." 
• Pastoral:  The binding refers here to the act of restoring a lost sheep by binding sins to Christ.

I want to unpack each of these, describe the Scriptural argument for each, its implications and its shortcomings.

Classic Medieval

In a nutshell:  The classic understanding of the office of the keys is nicely summarized by Martin Luther in his small catechism:

What is the Office of the Keys?  The Office of the Keys is the special authority which Christ has given to His Church on earth: to forgive the sins of the penitent sinners, but to retain the sins of the impenitent as long as they do not repent.

(See footnote for a longer passage of Luther) 

It is worth noting that the medieval Roman Catholic church and Luther were in agreement about what the keys did (see Aquinas on the office of the keys belonging to the church).  Luther disagreed about whether the keys belonged to the "holy Roman Catholic church" or the "holy catholic church, the communion of saints" and how the keys were dealt with through the sacramental system.

Biblical support:  All of this understanding arises from Matthew 16, Matthew 18 and John 20, in which Jesus gives the apostles authority to forgive sins and retain them.  It is worth noting that the wording is different in Matthew and John, with Matthew using the words "bind" and "loosen" and John using the words "forgive" and "hold/retain/grasp."

Implications and Shortcomings:  The mission of the church becomes clear:  act as a gate keeper for who is in and who is out of the Kingdom of God.  This clarifies and perhaps simplifies the task of the church in an age when the objectives often seem political and social.  

However, the church doors, physically and spiritually, become hard boundaries of God's mercy on earth.  As discipleship in Jesus moves from a Jewish renewal movement to an inter-continental institution, this boundary becomes a wall and the institution abuses its power, time and time again.

It also makes the point of life "getting into heaven" rather than experiencing eternal life, which begins here and now, as Jesus comes to us.

Rabbinic

In a nutshell:  This way of thinking might be new to some.  The binding and loosing, in this view, refer to the process by which community leaders, Rabbis, would determine what was morally permissible (or not) for a community.  A good article I found online by the author Kindalee Pfremmer De Long outlines it.  As she writes

In this practice of [rabbinic] binding and loosing, rabbis uphold the law as eternal and universal but recognize that new contexts require new decisions about how to bind or loose particular behaviors. 

Biblical support:  In the article by De Long, she delves more deeply into historical and linguistic support of this interpretation, which she acknowledges is solid but not exhaustively conclusive.  It is not a strictly biblical argument, per se, but one in which extra-Biblical sources allow us to better understand what the original authors (or in this case, the original speaker, Jesus) likely meant.

De Long also does not dismiss the classic way of understanding this passage.  She offers that both people may be bound or loosed (classic) and that laws or ethical standards may be bound or loosed (rabbinic).  I resonated with De Long's article, not simply in substance, but also tone.  She wrote in a generous spirit - rather than a "everyone got it wrong because we/I've discovered this social science data from the 1st century that upends everything you knew", she approached it with a "there is likely another layer to this that has impact for ministry" attitude.

Implications and Shortcomings:  In this way of thinking, Christian communities become loci of ethical and moral discernment.  For a community to exist, there must be agreed upon standards of behavior, processes for determining these standards and then means by which people are restored to the community. 

The Rabbinic perspective returns to the Achilles' heal for Protestants - once you've left the institution AND acknowledged that differences are inevitable, on what basis can you find unity and on what basis will your ethical teachings stand?  And furthermore, why attend a church that doesn't suit your moral proclivities, which increasingly means your political stances?  Like, if you disagree with your church's moral conclusion about some issue, why not leave?  In short, if your church is going to stake its hat on getting it right morally and you don't agree, why stay?

Pastoral

As a western and American, living in the 21st century, I live in just about the most autonomous and individualized culture in the earth's history.  Never before have people been less grounded in their past, including both family of origin and even biological gender.   In short, we tend to trust our feelings and are motivated to create a life, a story, an identity for ourselves, often over and against the entities that brought us to bear.  Our participation in society often amounts to signaling our virtue more than bearing one another's burdens and we move to "cancel" rather than listen.  

This all makes me acutely hungry for Matthew 18 and Jesus words about community.  More and more, in fact, I sense that God's Kingdom is a place where this individualism dissolves in Christ's grace.  I can stop having to create myself and simply let Christ define me.  While I retain a sense of distinction from others -- we do not become a blob -- I am finally able to get over myself in a way that I can be for others.  God's Kingdom allows for real community, truly communion, with God of course, but also with others.  In that light, I very much appreciated Rolf Jacobson's article about the community dynamics within Matthew 18.  Jacobson helps these words of the binding and loosing be heard in their context, namely, that of a good shepherd finding lost sheep.

If Jesus is indeed speaking about bringing people into "Life Together" as Bonhoeffer called it, what might binding look like?  Fascinatingly, Bonhoeffer ends his book with a chapter on Confession and Communion.  He extols the virtues of confession and bases participation in Holy Communion on confession.  Yet he does not mention binding of sins, but rather the proclamation of forgiveness. 

In short, a community needs to bind and loosen laws in terms of structuring life together, but given the reality of sin (see again Jacobson's article), inevitably we fill mess up before God and each other.  The only way forward is forgiveness and reconciliation.  Does this mean, then, that we have left the binding of sins behind or simply see binding as the way to remove people from the community?

μη γενιοτο (heck no!)  The community needs something bound in order for the key of loosing to work.  Sin must be dealt with.  The only binding that can actually hold a community together, then is confession and absolution, which is a binding of the sin to the cross and the freeing of the new creation for life together.

In reality, this binding will likely take weeks and be on-going given the capacity for humans to hurt ourselves and each other.  We will again and again need to bind the old sinner to the cross - our shame, our guilt, our pride, our fears, everything.  While I cannot prove it, I sense that a congregation that truly experiences this kind of forgiveness, not simply from the pulpit, but from each other (as Bonhoeffer envisions) is the kind of church that will cohere even when people disagree.  

***

PS  Longer Luther passage on the keys:

"We possess these two keys through Christ's command.  The key which binds it the power or office to punish the sinner who refuses to repent by means of a public condemnation to eternal death and separation from the rest of Christendom... The key which binds carries forward the work of the law.  It is profitable to the sinner in as much as it reveals to him his sins, admonishes him to fear God, causes him to tremble and moves him to repentance and not to destruction." ("The Keys", pg 372, LW 40)

Matthew 16:13-20

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year A, most recently Aug 23, 2026.
 
Summary:  This passage presents many powerful preaching angles that I try to amplify with the Greek. 

• Confessing Christ is the work of the individual and the church
• Confessing Christ is on-going
• Confessing Christ must happen on the road of life, even in places of moral rot
• Confessing Christ happens over and against other co-religionists and their confession of who Jesus is (I include here some research by NT Wright on the various 1st century understandings of what "Messiah" meant).

For 2026, I wondered what might be worth preaching on within Matthew's version because this story comes up in both Matthew and Mark's Gospel.  I am pondering how Peter is given his identity after his confession of Christ and the way in which identifying who Christ is allows us finally to hear and be identified as who we are.  In the 21st century, we obsess over identity and an identity that is self-constructed.  But here we discover that our identity cannot be found by our own analysis, but comes from Christ.  I don't have Greek analysis for this, just simply a point I am pondering!

Idea for a children's sermon:  the whole fish, Ι-Χ-Θ-Υ-Σ, i-ch-th-u-s, thing (Jesus Christ God's Son Savior) as the most basic confession.

λέγετε (saying, 16:15) When we hear this translated in English, we hear this a personal question:  "Who do you say that I am?"  Given that Peter individually responds, it is correct in acknowledging this is a question that we must each answer individually.  However, it is worth pointing out that this is a plural question.  The whole community is asked to confess Christ, one might even argue, together!

ἠρώτα (imperfect of ἐρωτάω, asking, 16:13)  This verb here is in the imperfect tense.  Jesus is repeatedly asking them.  This adds movement and emotion to the scene, but also points to the way in which our whole lives again and again, we will need to confess Christ.

καισαρειας φιλιππι (Caesarea Philippi, 16:13):  This town is not a coincidental mention.  It was a trading hub, located along some major land routes.  It had been associated in the past with Baal (OT Canaanite god) and Pan (Greek god).  In Jesus day, it was one of the Roman capitals in the area, with immense building projects undertaken by Herod, including the construction of a temple in honor of Augustus.  In fact, city's temple to Pan was believed to be located at the gates of Hades, a direct connection to the underworld.  Philippi epitomized the Greco-Roman religious milieu of the day: a pantheistic cult that continued to give more space to emperor worship; above all, a worship of beauty, sex, power and money. 

One can go even further though and think about the extent to which these are all not simply dead gods, but gods of death.  At the main temple in Caesarea Philippi, which was a temple believed to be the gates of Hades, people would offer dead animal sacrifices  (http://www.generationword.com/Israel/caesarea_philippi.htm good pictures!).  Hence the importance in Peter's confession that God is a living God! 

If you want to go even further, you can study more about what worship of Pan actually entailed, but now we would have an adult only sermon.

υιος του ανθροπος  (Son of Man 16:13).  As Christians we likely recognize this title as a reference to Jesus.  In fact, we often look at this title as one that uplifts Jesus as the pinnacle of humanity.  But what exactly does this title mean?  

On the one hand, this term is associated with the Messiah and his coming in glory in the book of Daniel:

• “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence.  He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. (7:13-14)

Yet, on the other hand, this particular title for an individual or humanity seems to suggest humanity's weakness:

• What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? (Psalm 8:4; See also Psalm 144:3)
• If even the moon is not bright and the stars are not pure in his eyes, how much less man, who is but a maggot-- a son of man, who is only a worm!" (Job 25:5-6)
• God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? (Numbers 23:19)

God also calls Ezekiel the Son of Man a number (80?) times; it is a way of reminding Ezekiel he is not divine.  In short, calling Jesus the Son of Man ascribes both majesty but also humility to him.  (I even checked with Wikipedia to see if I was missing something here; in fact, its article emphasizes my point about this title and humility.)

χριστος  (Christos, Messiah, 16:16)  Christos is Greek for anointed.  In Hebrew, the word for anointed is Messiah.  Peter is calling Jesus the Messiah.  The Old Testament strongly associates Messiah with a king, in the line of David, one who leads and protects the people.  

• The idea seems to be that a Messiah is a divine talisman, in that he has special protection (1 Sam 26:23; Psalm 20:6).  
• Interestingly, in Leviticus (4:6 eg) the High Priest is also referred to as the "anointed" or "Messiah."  
• Furthermore, Isaiah in chapter 61, declares himself anointed for his vision, hence prophet could also be understood as the role of the anointed (Psalm 105:15 connects this as well).  

As Messiah then could be understood to capture three offices:  king, priest and prophet, which matches up with Calvin's understanding of Christ and his offices.  

While Calvin and other theologians have tried to clarify what "Messiah" means, it is helpful to remember that various first century Jewish groups had their own understanding of the word.  Different factions within that society had different senses of what a Messiah would be like and what the Messianic age would entail. It can helpful to avoid statements like:  "All of the Jews expected X out of a Messiah."  Consider Christians today -- do we all have a common vision for what the return of Christ will look like?  While I will try to summarize some thoughts on what this term meant, I do so aware that this term had a variety of meanings.

If there is any common theme for first century understandings of Messiah, it would be a theme of conquering.  While Kings, priests and especially prophets may suffer, there seems a much stronger note of victory, even theology of glory, surrounding this term.  As NT Wright puts it:  "Everyone knew that a crucified Messiah was a failed Messiah." (p. 230, The New Testament and Its World.) This would explain why Peter so soon afterwards does not want Jesus to suffer!  (In short, Peter knew his Old Testament!).  It also shows a great contrast with the ideas laid out in Daniel for what to expect from the son of man. 

I would also add that NT Wright does a great job of unpacking the Jewish understanding of "son of man" and "messiah."  In his mind they work together, in that the Son of Man refers to Daniel 7 and comes with hopes of Israel's redemption over the foreign and invading empires.  While even Wright admits the Daniel 7 is bit more ambiguous of a connection, he helpfully demonstrates the Jewish people of the 1st century had very earthly hopes.  They all wanted an end to their situation as a puppet regime of Rome; they may have understood this happening in different ways, but ultimately, it was for the same reason.  In short, no first century Jew would have said:  "I want the Messiah to come, die in a humiliating fashion, be resurrected and then promise us that if we follow him, we will die and then enter into a non-earthly eternity with God that will include lots of non-Jews."  The Messiah was to bring about the new reign of God on earth, which included the vindication of Israel (p. 234, The New Testament and Its World).

πετρος /πετρα Petros Petra:  We've all heard that Peter's name means Rock, because he was the Rock on which the church would be built.  Both words clearly have a the same first few letters (Petr), but I am not sure if we must necessarily infer that Peter the person is what the church will be built on.  Beyond some linguistic oddities (Petra is a feminine noun and ends in an a, nothing like Peter's name's ending), the far more logical thing is that the church will be built on the confession, which comes from heaven.  I think the Bible really underscores this by showing Peter's misunderstanding just a few sentences later. Luther writes a sermon delving into why this passage is about the confession of Christ and not Peter's person.

αδης hades:  See my blog post on words for hell in the Bible.  http://lectionarygreek.blogspot.com/2012/09/mark-938-50.html

Grammar note:  In the infinitive phrase "Who do you say that I am" the word "I" is in the accusative (me).  Why?  Because in the subject of an infinitive clause is in the accusative, not the nominative.

Matthew 13:31-33, 44-52

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, year A, most recently July 26, 2026

Rather than offer a summary of these parables, I will offer a word or two comment on each parable.  Hopefully this can offer a connection to a parable for you

Parable of the mustard seed
παραθηκεν ("put before", 13:31)  Jesus does not tell them parables, he puts them before his disciples.  A reminder that we are invited to consider their meaning.

βασιλεια των ουρανων ("kingdom of heaven", 13:31)  A reminder that Matthew Gospel does not discuss the Kingdom of God, but rather the Kingdom of Heaven.  This is in contrast to the other writers of the new Testament.  Perhaps Matthew's Jewish roots made him uncomfortable using the word God?

λαχανων (-ον, "shrub/herb", 13:32) The word for tree/plant here signifies an edible plant.  A reminder that the mustard seed is intended for consumption by another, just like our lives.  While I am on the mustard seed...interesting the mustard seed was used to make chemical weapons in world war I.  Also used to make the first chemotherapy drugs.  A reminder that all things can be used for God's purposes.  Or not.

κατασκηνουν (-οω, "live in tent", 13:32)  John's Gospel tells us that Jesus "dwelt"/"tented" among us (same word.)  Is Jesus like one of the birds that dwells in the tree?  I don't think so, but hey, its a parable and always fun to ask the question:  Where is Jesus in this parable?

Parable of the kneading woman

ενεκρυψεν (literally and in meaning "encrypted", 13:33)  The kingdom is somehow hidden -- literally encrypted -- into this world.  I appreciate that this is a feminine protagonist!  I wonder if this is the work of the Spirit, to mash the Word into the world!

ζυμη (yeast, 13:33)  Fascinatingly Jesus compares the Kingdom of Heaven to a single-celled micro-organism that is considered fungi.  I am not going to preach on this, but there is some potential here -- it makes things rise; it takes a bit of heat, but not much; it is a fun-guy ;-)

σατα (from σατον, 13:33)  This is a Hebrew measure of flour, a reminder that this parable is (almost certainly) translated from the original that Jesus told!

Parable of the field and treasure
αγοραζει ("agorize" meaning "to buy or sell", 13:44;46)  Interesting economic metaphor.  If Christ is the one who finds us, the pearl, then Christ is the one who sells all that he has to buy us.  This is a pretty way (the only way??) to use the buy/sell metaphor common in Christian soteriology.

μαργαριτας ("margarita" meaning "pearl", 13:45)  Just wanted to everyone to know the word for pearl is margarita.  The Kingdom of God is like a margarita :-)

ευρων (from ευρισκω meaning "find", 13:44; 46)  A reminder that there a many lost and found parables in the Bible!

Parable of the net
γενους (literally genous, meaning "type" or "species"; 13:47)  This word can even mean peoples or races.  The net is intended for all people!!  (Not just fish!)

συναγαγουση (from συναγω meaning "gather", 13:47)  The purpose of the net is to gather all people together.  The word literally means synagogue.  The net is to bring us all into the same synagogue...

συντελεια (meaning "completion", 13:48)  I have no idea why Christians don't call it the fullness of all time instead of the end of time.  The word is completion and fullness, not termination!

Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43

This passage occurs in year A of the Revised Common Lectionary, most recently July 2026
 
Summary:  This passage lends itself very easily to a divided world in which there are good and bad people; the good get saved and the bad get punished in fire.  God tolerates the bad lest the good be obliterated.

One possible direction is one that Luther took, namely, using this passage as a plea for tolerance.  (Seriously, worth reading the big Luther quote at this site).

Another possibility is that each person is made up of both saint and sinner.  The sinner in each of us must be put to death.  Good religion is not what helps us divide the world into good and bad.  Good religion helps us purify the bad within each of us.

Key Words:
ζιζανια ("wheat resembling weed", 13:25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 36, 38, 40).  This likely refers to a particularly bad weed:

Lolium temulentum is a weed of wheat farmlands. Even a few grains of this plant will adversely affect crop quality. Its seeds are poisonous to people and livestock. It is very difficult to separate the seeds of L. temulentum from those of what and other small grain crops as they are similar in size and weight. L. temulentum can be a host to a variety of crop pests and diseases.  For more, read here.

οικοδεσποτος ("master of the house", 13:27)  I saw on Facebook in 2023 that someone did not like the metaphors of agriculture because God had too much power and ownership.  I am okay with these metaphors.

εχθρος ("enemy", 13:25 and 28)  This word comes from the word hate.  The enemy can mean "the hostile one."  When we have come to hate the other, we have become like the enemy.

There are three "syn" words closely written together
συλλεγοντες (13:29):  Collect

συναυξανεσθαι  (13:30):  Grow together
συναγαγετε (13:30):  Gather
συντελεια (13:39): Complete

I am still pondering what to make of this.  Some things bound must be undone (the sinner and saint).  Some binding still is yet to come (the faithful gathered).

σκανδαλα (σκανδαλον, meaning stumbling block, 13:41)  Finally, in the eschaton there are no more scandals :-)  Actually, I think there is a lot of good news here in that there is a furnace of πυρός (fire, 13:42).  Ultimately, the bad in this world needs to be destroyed.

ὁ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων (13:42)  One wonders if the weeping and gnashing of teeth is from those who suffer or from the one who knew that they must be destroyed!  Given that in the parable the weeds are entirely consumed, one possible interpretation is that people are not being tortured, but that this death produces sadness.