This week, a suicide attacker who appears to have concealed his explosives inside a turban killed a senior cleric and at least three other people on Thursday at a funeral service for the assassinated brother of the Afghan president in southern Kandahar city. The attack came just two days after a trusted family associate killed Ahmad Wali Karzai, probably the most powerful and controversial man in southern Afghanistan, at his home. Rejecting the Karzai regime and in an attemt to eliminate family members of the Karzai family, the Taliban wish to seize control of power in Afganistan (http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/07/14/suicide-bomber-kills-four-at-karzai-funeral/).
The Chief Priest and Elders of Jerusalem in Jesus’ day attempted to elimate Christ, who threatened their power and control over the Jewish people In Matthew 21, Jesus continued to respond to hostile retaliation by the hypocritical, threatened chief priests and elders, who had demanded that He tell them by what authority He carried on His ministry, and especially by what authority He had driven the merchants and moneychangers out of the Temple. After they had refused to say whether John the Baptist’s ministry was from God or men, Jesus indicted them by means of the parable of the two sons and explained it by declaring that tax-gathers and harlots would enter the kingdom before those religionists.
What is spoken in this parable is spoken to caution all that enjoy the privileges of the outward church. As we treat God’s people, we treat Christ himself, if he were with them... Let us ask ourselves, whether we who have the vineyard and all its advantages, render fruits in due season... Our Saviour, in his question, declares that the Lord of the vineyard will come, and when he comes he will surely destroy the wicked (Henry, M., & Scott, T. (1997). Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary (Mt 21:33). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems.).
In Matthew 21:33-46 Jesus directly confronts the Chief Priest and Elders of Jerusalem with another parable, the second in a trilogy of judgment parables (22:1–14), which even more graphically illustrated their willful rejection of God. There is affirmation on Jesus’ part that His position is superior to that of the prophets; (2) there is consciousness of a unique relation of sonship; (3) there is the conviction that He was sent from God as the final envoy; (4) there is recognition that rejection and death await Him, and this rejection clearly involves the judgment of Israel. This section is uniquely expressive of the mission of the Messiah as Suffering Servant (Augsburger, M. S., & Ogilvie, L. J. (1982). Vol. 24: The Preacher’s Commentary Series, Volume 24 : Matthew. The Preacher’s Commentary series (18). Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Inc.).
Jesus presents this message by showing 1) The work (Matthew 21:33) 2) The Wickedness (Matthew 21:34–39) 3) The wrath (Matthew 21:40–41) 4)The witness (Matthew 21:42) and finally 5) The withdrawal (Matthew 21:43–46).
1) The work (Matthew 21:33)
Matthew 21:33 [33]"Hear another parable. There was a master of a house who planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a winepress in it and built a tower and leased it to tenants, and went into another country (ESV).
Here we see a landowner who spends considerable time and labor developing a vineyard and then leases it to some tenants. The story of an absentee landowner reflects a familiar economic situation at the time; some of the chief priests and elders to whom Jesus is speaking would probably have owned land away from Jerusalem. The landowner must be a wealthy man, because a newly planted vineyard could not be expected to produce fruit for at least four years, during which he would have no return on his capital outlay (France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew. The New International Commentary on the New Testament (808–809). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co.).
As always in parabolic teaching, Jesus told a simple and understandable story, often including a shocking element, to explain a profound truth that was unknown or generally misunderstood. This situation involved in the parable of the master/landowner of a house who planted a vineyard which was commonplace in that agrarian society and was easy for His hearers to identify with. A vineyard was regarded as the most valuable plantation, which yielded the largest harvest, but required also the most constant labor and care (Lange, J. P., & Schaff, P. (2008). A commentary on the Holy Scriptures : Matthew (387). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.)
In New Testament times, the hillsides of Palestine were covered with grape vineyards, which were a mainstay of the economy. It was not unusual for a wealthy man to buy a piece of land and develop it for a vineyard. He would first put a fence/wall of stone or a hedge of briars around it to protect it from wild animals and thieves. He would then make a winepress, sometimes having to cut it out of bedrock. The grapes are put into this trough, and two or more persons, with naked feet and legs, get into it, where they jump up and down, crushing the fruit.… The juice flows into the lower part of the excavation (Lange, J. P., & Schaff, P. (2008). A commentary on the Holy Scriptures : Matthew (387). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.).
From there the grape juice would be poured into wineskins or clay jars for storage. Often the owner would build a tower, which would be used as a lookout post against marauders, as shelter for the workers, and as a storage place for seed and implements.
Please turn to Isaiah 5
Following our look last week in "The Parable of Costly Discipleship" of Luke 14:28-33, for those who consider the cost and built this tower, Jesus is further challenging their belief in having the necessary resources (ie. holiness) to build this tower.
Isaiah 5:1-7 [5:1]Let me sing for my beloved my love song concerning his vineyard: My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill. [2]He dug it and cleared it of stones, and planted it with choice vines; he built a watchtower in the midst of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; and he looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes. [3]And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard. [4]What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes? [5]And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard. I will remove its hedge, and it shall be devoured; I will break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down. [6]I will make it a waste; it shall not be pruned or hoed, and briers and thorns shall grow up; I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. [7]For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are his pleasant planting; and he looked for justice, but behold, bloodshed; for righteousness, but behold, an outcry! (ESV)
• Isaiah 5 shows the spiritual decline of the people of God and its consequences. Although they were planted by God and He made every provision for His people to be a blessing to the world (Gen. 12:1-3) they did not produce a fruit of righteousness unto God resulting in Judgment.
The details of the parable in Matthew 21 emphasized the owner’s great care in developing the vineyard. And when everything was in order, he leased/rented it out to tenants/vine-growers who claimed to be reliable caretakers, making an agreement (covenant) with them to pay a certain percentage of the proceeds to him as rent. The rest would belong to them, as payment for their work in cultivating the vineyard. With this agreement in place, the owner went into another country/on a journey.
• The basic comparison to the present time is evident. We must never regard the church as “our” field of ministry rather than keeping in mind that we are merely tenants, managing the Lord’s vineyard, and accountable to Him (Keener, C. S. (1997). Vol. 1: Matthew. The IVP New Testament commentary series (Mt 21:33). Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.).
Illustration: "Generally speaking, the more we have, the less grateful we are.
"A wise man prayed, ’Give me neither poverty nor riches, but give me only my daily bread. Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you and say, ’Who is the Lord?’ Or I may become poor and steal, and so dishonor the name of my God’" (Proverbs 30:8-9).
"It is a rare person who, when his cup frequently runs over, can give thanks to God instead of complaining about the limited size of his mug!" ( ’Jesus, Lord of Your Personality’ by Bob Russell, Howard Publishing Co., 2002, pp. 14-16. PreachingNow Newsletter, June 25, 2002.)
2) The Wickedness (21:34–39)
[34]When the season for fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to get his fruit. [35]And the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and stoned another. [36]Again he sent other servants, more than the first. And they did the same to them. [37]Finally he sent his son to them, saying, ’They will respect my son.’ [38]But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, ’This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and have his inheritance.’ [39]And they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. (ESV)
Jesus in Matthew 21:34 notes that some months later, when the season for fruit drew near /the harvest time approached, the owner sent his servants/slaves to the tenants/vine-growers to receive his agreed-upon percentage of fruit/produce. But instead of paying what they owed the owner, Matthew 21:35 notes that the tenants/vine-growers took his servants/slaves and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another/a third. As he did with the story of the fig tree (21:18–21; cf. Mark 11:12–14, 20–21). The servants’ fate recalls the treatment of God’s prophets throughout Old Testament history (e.g., Jer 20:1–2; 1 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 24:20–21; and cf. Matt 23:34) (Blomberg, C. (2001). Vol. 22: Matthew (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (323). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.).
Please turn to Mark 12
Matthew, under Holy Spirit inspiration, here condensed several episodes into one.
Matthew 21:36 notes that the owner sent other servants/another group of slaves more/larger than the first, and they did the same (thing) to them, from Mark’s account we learn other details of this story:
Mark 12:2-5 [2]When the season came, he sent a servant to the tenants to get from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. [3]And they took him and beat him and sent him away empty-handed. [4]Again he sent to them another servant, and they struck him on the head and treated him shamefully. [5]And he sent another, and him they killed. And so with many others: some they beat, and some they killed. (ESV)
The tenant growers had a marvelous opportunity to develop a good living. They had an excellent vineyard to cultivate and were given the trust of the owner to operate it. But they were not content with merely a good living; they wanted the whole harvest for themselves and were merciless in achieving that end.
After the brutal rejection of his servants, the owner at Matthew 21:37 notes sent his son to them, saying, “They will respect my son.” In real life, of course, this is unlikely. The owner would have had the law on his side, and he would have taken strong action to eject his defaulting tenants. But Jesus is telling a story that would illustrate the way a compassionate and loving God acts toward sinners, not the way a businessman would act to protect his investment. It is a parable depicting sin most unreasonable and love incomprehensible!” (Morris, L. (1992). The Gospel according to Matthew (541). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.)
How likely is it that a man whose servants have been mistreated and killed by his tenants will then send his beloved son to try to collect his share of the harvest? But this unreal story illustrates the incredible patience of God. It is truly mind-boggling that God would send his Son into the world after he had seen how his people treated the prophets. To our ears it also sounds unreal that the tenants who murdered the son should expect to take possession of his inheritance—especially while his father, the vineyard owner, is still alive. But selfish ambition and greed all too often and all too easily cause us to forget God’s presence (Albrecht, G. J., & Albrecht, M. J. (1996). Matthew. The People’s Bible (308). Milwaukee, Wis.: Northwestern Pub. House.).
In this parable the act of sending the son as Matthew 21:38 indicates, simply drove the growers to greater greed and more heinous treachery. When the tenants/vine-growers saw the son, they said to/among themselves, “This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and have/seize his inheritance.” Finally, Matthew 21:39 concludes, And they took him, and threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him. The ancient world was very conscious of class. So there is some reasonableness in the landowner’s expectation that his son would be respected. While someone else’s slaves could be mistreated with relative impunity, it would be quite another matter to mistreat someone’s son (Nolland, J. (2005). The Gospel of Matthew : A commentary on the Greek text (873). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.)
Jesus says they threw the son out of the vineyard before they killed him. We remember how the crucifixion took place outside the walls of Jerusalem (Hebrews 13:11, 12). Since Jesus was most likley telling this parable on Tuesday of Holy Week, he was describing what was going to happen only three days later (Albrecht, G. J., & Albrecht, M. J. (1996). Matthew. The People’s Bible (308). Milwaukee, Wis.: Northwestern Pub. House.).
Originally the sharecroppers had plotted simply to keep all the profits from the vineyard; now they planned to expropriate the entire vineyard.
When the son goes as his father’s messenger he goes with all his father’s authority, and so deserves “respect” and obedience. To reject the son’s demand is therefore the climax of rebellion. But to kill him is to add injury to insult (France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew. The New International Commentary on the New Testament (813). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co.)
The murder of the son was coldly premeditated. The growers did not mistake him for another slave but knew exactly who he was. It was for the very reason that he was the son that they planned his murder in order to have/seize his inheritance. By the end of this startling and dramatic parable, the interest of the Jewish leaders and the many bystanders was thoroughly piqued. The story generated great pity for the betrayed, grieving owner and resentful rage at the heartless, brutal growers. It was the very uncommonness of the owner’s patience and of the growers’ wickedness that Jesus’ wanted His hearers to notice.
Quotation: What of the Lord’s patience? C.H. Spurgeon said: "We have heard in these days a blasphemer stand on a public platform and say, “There is no God, and if there is a God,” taking out his watch, “let him strike me dead in five minutes.” When he still found himself alive, he argued that there was no God. The fact was, God was much too great to be put out of patience by such an insignificant wretch as he. (Spurgeon, C. H., & Carter, T. (1995). 2,200 quotations : From the writings of Charles H. Spurgeon : Arranged topically or textually and indexed by subject, Scripture, and people (Trade pbk. ed.) (137). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.)
3) The wrath (Matthew 21:40–41)
Matthew 21:40-41 [40]When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?" [41]They said to him, "He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons." (ESV)
In typical rabbinical fashion, Jesus led His hearers to finish the story themselves, asking, in Matthew 21:40 “What will he do to those tenants/vine-growers?” The chief priests and elders readily replied with moral indignation, in Matthew 21:41“He will put/bring those wretches to a miserable death/wretched end, and (will) let/rent out the vineyard to other tenants/vine-growers, who will give/pay him the fruits/proceeds in/at their (proper) seasons.” They no doubt were highly pleased with this unusual opportunity to parade their self-righteousness before Jesus. They rightly assessed the proper ending of the parable, that the irate owner would first severely punish the wicked growers and then replace them with others who were reliable. They were completely unaware that, as they fed their pride on Jesus’ baited question, they sprang the trap of their own condemnation.
Illustration: In the days of the pioneers, when men saw that a prairie fire was coming, what would they do? Since not even the fastest of horses could outrun it, the pioneers took a match and burned the grass in a designated area around them. Then they would take their stand in the burned area and be safe from the threatening prairie fire. As the roar of the flames approached, they would not be afraid. Even as the ocean of fire surged around them there was no fear, because fire had already passed over the place where they stood.
When the judgment of God comes to sweep men and women into hell for eternity, there is one spot that is safe. Nearly two thousand years ago the wrath of God was poured on Calvary. There the Son of God took the wrath that should have fallen on us. Now, if we take our stand by the cross, we are safe for time and eternity (Michael P. Green. (2000). 1500 illustrations for biblical preaching (207). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.).
4)The witness (Matthew 21:42)
Matthew 21:42 [42]Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: "’The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?
At first glance, this comment seems irrelevant to the parable. But the Lord was using a familiar passage from the Old Testament to reinforce the parable’s point, and in doing so He changed metaphors. In a sarcastic query He asked the self-appointed authorities on the Old Testament, “Have/did you never read in the Scriptures?” and then cited the well-known words of Psalm 118:22. Psalm 118:22–23, here quoted exactly according to the LXX version, is part of the climax to the Hallel psalm which has already featured in Jesus’ royal ride to the city (v. 9, alluding to vv. 25 and 26 (France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew. The New International Commentary on the New Testament (815). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co.)
Jesus quoted the same psalm from which were token the acclamations of the multitude in His triumphal entry into Jerusalem, when He was hailed by the messianic title, Son of David (Matt. 21:9). And it was, in fact, for His accepting that messianic praise that Jesus was rebuked by the Pharisees (Luke 19:39) Now, from the same section of the psalm, Jesus reminded the religious leaders of the stone that/which the builders rejected has become the (chief) cornerstone.
A cornerstone was the most basic and essential part of a building, from which the proper placement and alignment of every other part was determined. If the cornerstone was imperfectly cut or placed, the symmetry and stability of the entire building would be adversely affected. Sometimes the builders rejected a number of stones before the right one was selected. In this account, one such rejected stone eventually has become the (chief) cornerstone. Jesus’ role gives shape to all of history. His presence defines the church. Though rejected by those who should have known better, Jesus was placed in the honored position by his heavenly Father. (Barton, B. B. (1996). Matthew. Life application Bible commentary (425). Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers.)
Please turn to Acts 4
For many centuries, Israel had been the stone which the empire builders of the world had rejected as insignificant and despised, fit only for exploiting and then discarding. But in the Lord’s divine plan, Israel was chosen to be the (chief) cornerstone in the redemptive history of the world, the nation through which salvation would come.
But the figure has an even greater significance than that Peter declared in Jerusalem before the religious rulers shortly after Pentecost
Acts 4:10-12 [10]let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead--by him this man is standing before you well. [11]This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. [12]And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." (ESV)
The greater stone than Israel is Jesus Christ, and the builders who rejected Him were the Jewish leaders, representing all Israel, and in a fuller sense the entire unbelieving world. The stone … rejected was the crucified Christ, and the restored (chief) corner stone is the resurrected Christ. This imagery lies behind the description of Jesus as the akrogôniaios, “top corner stone,” of God’s building, the church, in Eph 2:20; cf. 1 Peter 2:6 where the same term occurs in the LXX quotation from Isa 28:16, also applied to Jesus (France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew. The New International Commentary on the New Testament (815–816). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co.).
When they told Jesus that the wretched vine-growers would be brought to a wretched end (v. 41), the Temple rulers judged themselves. Jesus, in effect, had said to the chief priests and elders, “You are the men! You are the wretched vine-growers who, by your own declaration, deserve a wretched end for beating and killing the vineyard owner’s servants and then killing his son. Don’t you realize that the owner is God, the vineyard is His kingdom, the wall/hedge is the Law of Moses which separated Israel from the Gentiles and preserved them as a distinct people for the Lord,. the servants were His prophets, and Jesus is His Son. He says in essence that you have just judged yourselves guilty of condemning to death not only the prophets but even God’s own Son.” (MacDonald, W., & Farstad, A. (1997). Believer’s Bible Commentary : Old and New Testaments (Mt 21:40–41). Nashville: Thomas Nelson).
Illustration: During the building of Solomon’s Temple, It took 30,000 workmen over seven years to complete the temple. According to I Kings 6 all the stones were quarried far away from the building site, so there was no sound of hammering heard there. Jewish tradition says one day the building superintendent saw an unusual stone being delivered. Because it was cut in an odd shape, he thought it was flawed. He had it rolled away into the Kidron Valley where it lay untouched and unnoticed. Years later, the builder sent word to the quarry that he was ready for the main corner stone. The quarry master came and reported, “Why, I had that stone delivered years ago. When they began to search they discovered the discarded stone in the valley was the main cornerstone. It was covered with debris and moss. It took many men working hard to raise the massive stone out of the valley. When they raised it and set it, it fit perfectly! The chief cornerstone was the very rock they rejected (http://www.sermoncentral.com/sermons/the-shocking-truth-about-god-david-dykes-sermon-on-jesus-teachings-56696.asp).
5) The withdrawal (Matthew 21:43–46).
Matthew 21:43-46 [43]Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. [44]And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him." [45]When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. [46]And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet. (ESV)
With those straightforward, unambiguous words, Jesus removed whatever uncertainty may have remained in the minds of the chief priests and elders about what He was saying to them. In the first half of verse 43 and in verse 44, the Lord reiterated the judgment on unbelieving Israel and her ungodly leaders; in the second half of verse 43 He reiterated their replacement by believing Gentiles.
“Therefore I tell/say to you,” the Lord declared, no doubt looking intently into the eyes of His adversaries, “the kingdom of God will be taken away from you?” In their stead the kingdom would be given to a people/nation producing its fruits. The kingdom of God upon earth is here compared to a vineyard, furnished with all things requisite to an advantageous management and improvement of it. (1.) God planted this vineyard. The church is the planting of the Lord, Isa. 61:3 (Henry, M. (1996). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible : Complete and unabridged in one volume (Mt 21:33–46). Peabody: Hendrickson.).
When he first began preaching the kingdom, John the Baptist demanded that the Pharisees and Sadducees who wanted to be baptized first “bring forth fruit in keeping with repentance” (Matt. 3:8). fruits of the kingdom is the demonstrated righteousness produced out of a life turned from sin (see Phil 1:11; Col. 1:10). The unbelieving religious leaders would not turn from their sin and repent, and therefore they could not produce kingdom fruits (genuinely righteous behavior). They were spiritually barren, and because of that willful barrenness they were cursed, like the fig tree that had leaves but no figs (21:18–19).
As the only citizens of God’s kingdom, only believers are equipped by the Holy Spirit to bear kingdom fruits.
John 15:5 [5]I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. (ESV)
Verse 43 is unique to Matthew. The use of ethnos (“a people”—a collective singular) suggests more than simply the appointment of new leaders; it envisages a new community of disciples who perform the works God commands (Blomberg, C. (2001). Vol. 22: Matthew (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (325). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.).
The people/nation (Ethnos), who produce the fruit of the kingdom is the church:
1 Peter 2:9 [9]But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. (ESV)
• The same presentation is given by Paul in Romans 11:11–24, where he used the image of branches being grafted into the olive tree (Barton, B. B. (1996). Matthew. Life application Bible commentary (425). Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers.).
Matthew 21:44 indicates that he who falls on this rejected stone, that is, Jesus Himself will be broken to pieces. The Jewish leaders who, as it were, fell on Jesus and put Him to death would themselves be broken to pieces. And on when it falls on anyone, it will crush/scatter him (like dust). For those who will not have Jesus as Deliverer, He becomes Destroyer. Just as the Father has given all salvation to the Son (John 14:6), He has also “given all judgment to the Son” (John 5:22). The destruction of the Temple in AD 70 was at least part of the judgment Jesus spoke of here (cf. 24:2; Luke 21:20). There is some doubt over the authenticity of 21:44, which may be interpolated from Luke 20:18. It is not included in several ancient witnesses (Turner, D., & Bock, D. L. (2005). Cornerstone biblical commentary, Vol 11: Matthew and Mark (276). Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.).
Please turn to Daniel 2
Through Daniel the Lord predicted Christ’s ultimate coming in judgment against the unbelieving peoples and nations of the world, represented by the magnificent and seemingly invulnerable statue of gold, silver, bronze, iron, and clay.
Daniel 2:32-35 [32]The head of this image was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its middle and thighs of bronze, [33]its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. [34]As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. [35]Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. (ESV)
• The person who rejects Christ be broken to pieces, crushed into powder and scattered like dust just as the Lord Jesus Christ Himself had warned. God’s enemies are destined to be pulverized into nothingness To try to destroy Christ is to assure one’s own destruction
There was no mistaking in Matthew 21:45 that these wicked religious leaders, typified by the chief priests and the Pharisees, were the objects of Jesus’ denunciation and condemnation. Beyond any doubt, they perceived/understood that He was speaking about them. They knew they were the wretched vine-growers who despised the vineyard owner and beat and killed his servants and eventually killed his son. They knew they were the builders who had rejected the stone that would become the chief corner stone and that, because of that rejection they themselves would be rejected by God and forbidden entrance into His kingdom.
Their only thoughts were of self-justification and revenge, so their reaction was to seize Jesus and put Him to death, just as they had been plotting since the beginning of His ministry. The hindrance to that happening was as Matthew 21:46 notes they feared the crowds/multitude, because they held Jesus to be a prophet. The leaders had contempt for God but no fear of Him. They also had contempt for the crowds/multitude but did fear what they might do.
This amazing passage portrays God’s gracious provision for His people, His patience with their unbelief and rejection, and His love in sending even His only Son for their redemption. But it also displays His righteous judgment that will be executed when His divine patience has run its course.
The passage also portrays Jesus’ deity as the Son of God, His obedience to His Father’s will, His willingness to come to earth and die for the redemption of God’s people, and His resurrection. But it also displays His coming one day as the instrument of divine judgment, to destroy and break in pieces those who have rejected Him.
And the passage portrays sinful humanity, its great blessings and privileges from God, its opportunity to receive truth from His prophets and eternal life from the Son. It portrays their responsibility and their accountability before a loving but just God, before whom they will be either redeemed because of faith or condemned because of unbelief.
(Format Note: Outline from Willmington, H. L. (1999). The Outline Bible (Mt 21:33–46). Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers. Some base commentary from MacArthur, J. (1989). Matthew (Mt 21:33–45). Chicago: Moody Press.)
