Matthew 20 Study Notes

20:1-7 In Jewish parables, authority figures like a wealthy landowner typically represent God. A denarius was the wage for a day’s work in the first century.

20:8 The words starting with the last and ending with the first recall 19:30 and show that this parable is an illustration of the principle taught there.

20:9-12 Since those who worked only one hour received a denarius, a full day’s wage, other workers expected to be paid proportionately—one denarius an hour.

20:13-15 The workers had no right to protest their pay since their wage was the normally accepted sum and since they had agreed to work for this wage in the first place (v. 2). Just as the landowner was free to dispense his wealth as he saw fit, God is free to dispense his grace as he determines. The first workers hired represent people who consider themselves to be of greater importance to God, like the self-righteous man in 19:16-26. The last workers hired represent people like the twelve disciples, who live sacrificially but will be rewarded far more generously than they expect or deserve.

20:16 This repeats 19:30. Since this is repeated immediately before and after the parable of the vineyard workers, it is the key to interpreting the parable. The conjunction at the beginning of 19:30 links this discussion with the one about the unexpected reward of Jesus’s disciples.

20:17-19 This is Jesus’s third major prediction of his death since Peter’s confession (see 16:21; 17:22-23). Each prediction adds additional details. This time he added that he would be mocked, flogged, and crucified at the hands of Gentiles.

20:20 Zebedee’s sons were James and John (see note at 4:18-22).

20:21 Jesus had promised that his disciples would sit on twelve thrones ruling over Israel in the renewal of all things (19:28-29). Now James and John sought, through their mother, to gain prominence over their fellows. Along with Peter, they were members of Jesus’s inner circle. Because Jesus rebuked Peter in 16:23, they may have aspired to usurp Peter’s position of prominence as well.

20:22-23 The cup was a metaphor for suffering (26:39). Jesus’s question probed the disciples’ willingness to suffer for him like he would suffer for them. You will indeed drink my cup foretells the sufferings of James (Ac 12:1-2) and John. The parable in Mt 20:1-16 demonstrated that the Father distributes reward as he chooses, not according to merit. Jesus confirmed again the principle of the Father’s freedom to determine who will enjoy heaven’s greatest blessings.

20:24-28 The competition between the disciples exposed their pride. Jesus called his disciples to the same humble servitude that he modeled. The ultimate expression of his humility was his own sacrificial death that served as a ransom for believers. Jesus’s words echo the themes of Is 53, which Matthew applied to Jesus in Mt 8:17.

20:29-34 The parallel passage in Mk 10:46-52 refers to only one blind man, not two blind men. However, since Mark gives the name of the blind man he mentions, he was probably known to Mark’s original readers. Mark did not mention the other blind man because he wished to focus attention only on the man with whom his readers were familiar. On Son of David, see note at 1:1.