THE PARABLE OF THE TALENTS IN MATTHEW 25:14–30

BY ESAYAS EMENE ENICHA (REV.)

Conversely, pointing to the climax of the story in the punishment of the wicked and slothful servant (vs. 24-30), Davies and Allison argue that the parable is more a warning than an encouragement, however, without eliminating the positive elements (“enter into the joy of your lord”). 87 Since the verbs enter (εἴσελθε , eiselthe) (Matt. 25:23), take away (ἄρατε , arate), and give (δότε , dote) (Matt. 25:28) are imperatives which dominate the parable, the parable discloses warning rather than exhortation.

In determining its form, the other aspect of this parable is its allegorical feature or symbolism. Accordingly, Davies and Allison present the symbolism as follows:

The master is Jesus. His slaves represent the church, whose members have received various responsibilities. The master’s departure is the departure of the earthly Jesus. The long time of the master’s absence is the age of the church. His return is the parousia of the Son of man. The rewards given to the good slaves stand for heavenly rewards given to the faithful at the great assize, and their joy is that of the messianic banquet. The punishment of the evil slave represents those within the church who, through their sins of omission, condemn themselves to the eschatological darkness. 88

Hence, the Parable of the Talents communicates the church’s responsibility in using God’s gift here in this world, and also discloses the consequence of productive and unproductive use of talents and responsibility in awaiting the Parousia. However, in the study of this parable, some argue that the moralizing approach (‘use of talents to the best of your ability’), do not take into account the eschatological horizon (the return of the master and the accounting). 89

Conversely, the sensationalistic speculation about the end time paralyzes people with fear of a stereotyped picture of God and turns away from any kind of productive study of prophecy.90 Therefore, the exegesis of this parable attempts to address both aspects (use of talents and responsibility in the church as well as the eschatological reward or punishment).

C. BACKGROUND TEXTS

The Parable of the Talents has no direct quotation or allusion from the Old Testament. One of the striking similarities is described in 3 Baruch 12-16, where three groups of angels bring baskets of flowers which represent the ‘merits of the righteous’ whom the angels oversee. The first group has full baskets. The second group has baskets half full. The third group has empty baskets. Both the first and the second groups of angels are given rewards for the righteous they represent. But the third group is instructed to punish those without merit.91 However, as Davies and Allison argue, it is questionable whether it can be regarded as background for the parable. It could well be that 3 Baruch, on the contrary, depends upon our parable, or perhaps the texts are variants of a common folk-motif.92

D. PARALLEL TEXTS

The Parable of Minas in Luke 19:12-27 is parallel to this pericope. Even though there are distinctive wordings of Luke (vs. 12, 14, 15a, 25, 27), and no verbatim agreement in similar expressions, nevertheless in both Matthew and in Luke, servants have been given money with the same basic theme of trading with their master’s money.93

However, the source of both parables is most debatable. In terms of the source, the parables cannot be identified as Q texts because neither Luke nor our parable appears in a context of Q material.94 Therefore, determining the source of these parables is subject to speculation.

In this regard, Hagner argues that, unless Jesus spoke two similar parables, both passages go back originally to the same parable and differences developed early in the process of transmission.95 Contrarily, Luz argues that the parable in Matthew comes from his special material and that of Luke is an independently transmitted variant. As to him, the similarities of both parables show that the wording of the story is already relatively stable in the oral tradition.96 I support the prior position, because the similarity of

92 Ibid.

93 Ibid … 403.

94 Luz, Matthew 21-28, 248 “Q is the symbol to denote a source containing the matter common to Matthew and Luke but not in Mark”.

95 Hagner, Matthew 14-28.733.

96 Luz, Matthew 21-28, 248.