There were two statements that were often uttered in my home during my childhood that might seem impossible to bring together. One of them was uttered at times by my mom toward me. It would alter a little bit on occasion, but most of the time it sounded like this: “Just wait till your dad gets home.” This phrase, as you might guess, was typically spoken by my mom when I had been disobedient.
I assume many of you had moms who spoke those same words and know exactly what I’m talking about. But just in case you didn’t, here’s how it worked. I would disobey somehow, the particulars aren’t important for the story, so we can skip the details. And my mom would either be at the end of her rope or simply recognize that her discipline was proving to be less than effective. So, she would think to herself, “Lee obviously needs a greater discipline than I can dish out,” and she would say, “Just wait till your dad gets home,” meaning that when Dad came home, he’d hand out the discipline. Needless to say, I hated that phrase, “Just wait till your dad gets home.”
The second phrase was, “I can’t wait till Dad gets home.” That one was uttered by me toward whomever would listen. It was either because I wanted to play something with him, or show him something I did, or the like. And I would get so excited thinking about him coming home that I’d sometimes wait outside just so no time would be lost between him pulling up in the driveway and the two of us beginning playing or conversing.
Now, what might seem odd about that is that those two statements almost seem incompatible. One created dread where I was tormented by thinking about the moment Dad walked through the door and the other created so much excitement I didn’t want to have to wait for him to walk through the door but would run out to meet him. But the reason they’re not incompatible is because a dad loving his Son requires both a willingness to discipline, even sternly, and a willingness to play, and talk, and delight in his Son. To only provide one of those would be to lack love, wouldn’t it?
So, though these two realities of a father can seem incompatible at first, it is actually true that both are needed to be a good father. I think that as we look at our text this morning we need to let our minds think of the Lord in similar ways. In Matthew 20:1-16 Jesus tells a parable that reveals to us what God is like, what is his nature, and how he works. And it can be that our reaction is to want to hold to one of these aspects of God’s nature and reject the other. But I hope that we’ll see that both of these realities of God’s nature are necessary for us to acknowledge if we are to truly know God.
Before noting what the parable teaches us about the nature of God, however, let’s note the parable itself. In these verses Jesus tells a parable of a man who decides to hire day laborers to work in his vineyard. This would have been a typical practice where men come out early in the morning to the marketplace, hoping someone might hire them for the day and, as was the custom, pay them at the end of the day for the day’s work. So, he goes out early in the morning, probably about 6:00 AM, agrees to pay some laborers a denarius, and sends them to work in his vineyard. Then, about third hour of the day (about 9:00 AM), the man sees some others standing and waiting to be hired in the marketplace. He says to them, “You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you” (v. 4). They, of course, need the work and assume this man is a man of integrity, so they go and begin their labor in his vineyard three hours after the initial group of men had begun working. And so this happens again so that more men are hired about noon, others about 3:00 PM, and still others about 5:00 PM (one hour before the work day would end).
Then, the owner of the vineyard called all the laborers together at the end of the day to pay them, as again was the custom. He started with the men who had been hired at the end of the day and were only able to work one hour. Surprisingly, however, he gave them a denarius, which would have been expected pay for a full day of work. Obviously, the man was showing great generosity to these men.
Therefore, when it came time to pay the group that had worked the entire 12-hour day, they fully expected to receive much more than their agreed-upon wage of a denarius. But the owner of the vineyard gave them the agreed-upon amount, a denarius. Consequently, they grumbled at the master of the house, saying, “These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching hear” (v. 12).
Then the master answered, “Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give the last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?” (vv. 13-15). And, of course, he was making a fair point. The master had in no way cheated the men who had been hired at the beginning of the day. He paid them exactly what they had agreed upon. They received a just wage. Moreover, the money being paid out belonged to him, and he had every right to choose to be exceptionally generous to those who only worked one hour if he wanted. After all, it’s his money. Their grumbling simply had no basis. The master had been just toward them, and what is it to them if he wanted to show generosity toward some others?
That’s the parable. And obviously parables are meant to make a point about something greater. Jesus makes this quite clear to us by beginning this chapter saying, “For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house …” (v. 1). He’s telling us that this parable reflects a truth or truths about the kingdom of God. Moreover, the parable clearly ties to what has come before because there is a repeated line in verse 16 (“So the last will be first, and the first last”) that we just saw in the previous section (19:30). So somehow this is tied to Peter pointing out their sacrifices to follow Christ and Jesus’ answer that they would receive much more than they ever thought possible, including eternal life.
What then is this parable meant to teach us? I believe it’s meant to teach us a few things about our Lord himself. The first is that:
This is the point of the master’s first answer to the workers as they grumble and complain. After they say, “These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat,” he answers, “Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you and go” (v. 13-14a). That is, he is saying, “I acted justly.” He didn’t cheat the works but gave them their just due.
Now, in the parable, the master represents the Lord in that the Lord himself is never less than just in his dealings with his creatures. I think that’s part of the answer the Lord was giving Peter in the previous section of text. You’ll remember that Peter was basically asking Jesus if he and the rest of the twelve would get a reward for leaving everything and following Christ. And Jesus made clear that Peter needed to recognize that the Lord wasn’t somehow less than just with him. Jesus said much more than that to Peter, but that much was clear.
So, when Jesus begins chapters 20 with the word “for,” he’s illustrating and explaining the conversation he’s just had with Peter, and so he repeats the point again in a pointed way—the Lord is never less than just.
There will never be a human being who will be able to say before the Lord in judgment that he has somehow been cheated or treated unfairly or treated unjustly. The Lord always does what is just and never does less than that.
Perhaps this is best communicated by picking categories of people and making specific application of this point to each of them. So let me put it this way, no one in hell will be able to say that God dealt with him unjustly or somehow gave him less than he deserved. Hell is not God acting toward his unrepentant creatures in a way that is more severe than what is deserved by them. He judges justly.
A mere perusal of the first few chapters of Romans reminds us of this as Paul notes that:
Unbelievers are storing up wrath for themselves on the day when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed as he renders to each one according to his works (Rom 2:5-6).
Again, Paul asks the very question if God is “unrighteous to inflict wrath on us?” and then answers, “By no means!” (Rom 3:5-6) before adding, “Their condemnation is just” (3:8).
God’s judgment toward unbelievers which is described in terms of an eternal lake of fire in Scripture where their torment goes on day and night is God acting justly. It doesn’t mean that we have to be able to fully wrap our head around it, but we dare not suggest in any capacity that for God to punish sinners as he does in judgment is somehow less than just.
In perhaps a scene that may make us uncomfortable, Revelation 16:5-7, angels witness the judgment of unbelievers and cry out, “Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was, for your brought these judgments. . . . It is what they deserve! . . . Yes, Lord God the Almighty, true and just are your judgments.” Again, God is never less than just, even in his judgment toward unbelievers.
But then, one might ask, isn’t God unjust in his forgiveness of believers then? After all, it’s not that our claim is that because of our merits we deserve something better than unbelievers. Rather, we speak of being shown the grace of God, of received undeserved favor. So, if God is acting justly in giving sinners their just punishment, is he acting unjustly in giving believers something less than their just punishment?
The answer, according to Scripture is that even in forgiving believers God is acting justly. But how? The answer is in Romans 3:25-26. There, Paul notes that God put forth his son “as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”
In other words, from the beginning when God would forgive sinners, passing over their sins and not giving them the just punishment they deserved, it called into question his justice. It looked year after year as if God was being less than just. However, when his Son took on flesh and died in our place, as our substitute, bearing the punishment that our sins deserved, he did that in order to “show God’s righteousness” as the text says.
As Christ died on the cross, bearing God’s wrath for our sins in our place, God was saying, “I didn’t simply look over your sins. I haven’t ignored the fact that you deserve judgment. Your forgiveness isn’t me deciding your sins aren’t serious enough to be judged.” Rather, he puts forth his Son so that the full judgment of our sins might be poured out. And they were. Christ drank the full cup of the wine of God’s wrath that we deserved, dying in our place as our substitute. Consequently, God forgives us but shows himself still just, not turning a blind eye toward sin. Therefore, Paul notes that Christ bore God’s wrath in our place so that God might “be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”
Therefore, even in our forgiveness God does not compromise his justice. Our forgiveness before God is just because God the Son bore the punishment for our sins in our place as our substitute and was raised on the third day. That’s the good news Scripture announces for those who believe in Christ.
This is one of many ways in which the truth of Christianity is shown to be superior to Islam. In Islam, the false God who is worshipped will forgive, but in doing so, he throws justice to the wind. There is no just forgiveness, only turning a blind eye from the punishment that sinners deserve. In truth, in Christianity, our forgiveness is just, for our God is never ever less than just in anything, including his dealing with his creatures.
However, that is not where this parable ends and not the only (or even main) point the parable makes. We also see that:
This is the second answer the master gives the grumbling men in the parable. After noting his justice toward them (giving them exactly what they agreed to at the beginning of the day), he then answers, “I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?” (vv. 14-15).
The point is, of course, this giving of a full denarius (a full day’s wage) for only one hour’s worth of work was an act of exceptional grace and generosity. Now, what’s interesting is the language the master in the parable had used with the workers. With the workers hired at 6:00 AM, he specifically mentioned the price—a denarius. But note what he says to those after the initial workers. He mentions in v. 4, “You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you.”
He would give them whatever is right. That is, he’d not be less than just. But he was going to be more than just. He was going to be exceptionally gracious. They agreed to justice, and they received rich grace.
Since we see that this parable is also connected to what came before with Peter, this also speaks to Peter’s specific issue. Peter wanted to make sure he got what he deserved. After all, as he points out, they had left everything and followed Jesus (19:27). Therefore, he asked Jesus, “What then will we have?” And if Peter would looking to make sure that they get their just reward, he would have been humbled because Jesus’ answer is that they’ve given up temporary realities while his blessing is for them to judge from twelve thrones alongside of him (v. 28), get a hundred fold in this life of anything they’ve lost (v. 29), and get eternal life (v. 29).
In other words, Jesus is giving a gentle rebuke to Peter, noting, “Son, you don’t want me to work simply on just terms with you because I’m willing to be exceptionally gracious.”
And we need to recognize that this is our God, and this is how he has dealt with us. Because of our sin, he would have justly condemned us. But he didn’t. Instead, he sent his Son who willingly paid our penalty for us as our substitute. And then he demands of us not sufficient work to merit eternal life (we couldn’t do that) but simply repentance and faith in the crucified and risen Lord. His answer to our faith is to remove our sin and credit us with the perfect righteousness of Christ.
In other words, just as Peter needed to understand, you and I need to throw away some category of merit in regards to our standing before the Lord. We stand as objects of his rich grace. As we trust in Christ, we are the objects of his approval, whom he loves, whom he cares for, for whom he works everything together for good, and to whom he gives eternal life. And he makes sacrifice really impossible. I don’t mean that we do not make sacrifices to follow Christ. Of course we do. I mean that on the last day, when put on the scales, they won’t register as sacrifices. We will give of our temporary resources here and gain eternal treasure there. We will serve here and know true greatness there. We will perhaps lose our lives but only to know eternal life.
Our God is amazingly gracious toward his people and delights in being so. He is gracious toward us because he loves us. And he loves us just because he loves us. It’s certainly not because we lovable, for as we’re already stated, he would have been just to condemn us outside of Christ’s work. So let us rejoice in God’s grace toward us and his just pardon of our sins, but this leads us to one final exhortation from this text.
I don’t want to press the parable too far, but the master didn’t have to hire the workers that he hired at the beginning of the day. They were waiting in the marketplace to be hired because they didn’t have work. They were in need of grace, and they were shown grace simply in being hired. For them to then begrudge the master for being generous toward others is to fail to see that they themselves were objects of his generosity.
Moreover, the idea of them begrudging the master’s generosity is worthy of the rebuke they received. And the idea of anyone begrudging the Lord’s generosity toward another is so utterly out of place. But perhaps we’re tempted to do that very thing. Perhaps we’re tempted to begrudge the Lord for making our neighbor’s lot in life a bit simpler or more blessed. But if that’s our struggle, I think our main solution is to return to the first two points of this sermon: 1) realize that it would have been just for us to be condemned, and 2) realize that we are the objects of the Lord’s amazingly rich grace. When we deserve death and hell but instead are the objects of the Lord’s love who will know eternal life, we cannot help but overflow with love for our Lord and our neighbor.
Therefore, perhaps this morning, we just need to dwell on these realities of God’s justice and his grace. Remember what we justly deserve. Realize what we’re graciously getting. And then marvel even more than our gracious forgiveness is itself just because Christ bore the penalty for our sins. If we will take hold of these truths and root them in our hearts, it will be life-changing.
Jesus says we keep his commandments because we love him, and we love him because we know that he first loved us. So, let us realize his love for us this morning, pray that the Lord would anchor that truth in your heart, and then seek to obey our wondrously majestic God who is never less than just but has been amazingly gracious to us through his crucified and risen Son. Amen.