“THE PARABLE OF THE WEDDING BANQUET”

(MATTHEW 22:1-14)

AN EXEGETICAL PAPER SUBMITTED

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS
OF THE COURSE
HERMENEUTICS

BY
JUAN DELA CRUZ

DECEMBER 10, 2021

Page 1 of 23
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

I. Introduction …………………………………………………………………….....3

II. The Book Setting ……………………………………………………………….....4

III. The Wider Context ………………………………………………………….....…5

“Jerusalem Receives and Rejects Her King” (Mt. 19-25)

IV. The Immediate Context ………………………………………………………..…6

“The Parable of the Wedding Banquet” (Mt. 22:1-14)

V. The Genre …………………………………………………………………………8

VI. Historical and Cultural Background ………………………………………...……10

VII. Grammatical Structure and Literary Analysis ……………………………..…….13

VIII. Summary/Conclusion …………………………………………………….….…..20

IX. Application ………………………………………………………………………21

Bibliography ………………………………………………………………….….23

Page 2 of 23
 I. Introduction

Matthew 22:1-14 is popularly known as the Parable of the Wedding Banquet. Jesus

presented His teachings in a very amazing way. First is the way He used parable in illustrating

His arguments. Parable is very challenging to study because the tendency to allegorize the

contents is potential. Why did Jesus use a parable and what was the meaning of this parable?

Secondly, the way He illustrated the Kingdom of Heaven was filled with action - the banquet, the

invitation, the response, and the judgment. Does it reveal character of God in dealing with

situation and people? Does each situation in the parable possess meaning, or does the parable

address a specific matter only? Thirdly, the famous verse 14 is very intriguing. This is commonly

used in justifying human salvation and calling in ministry. What does the verse really mean to

us?

The goal of this paper is to provide correct interpretation of Mt. 22:14. This verse is

usually misinterpreted. It will also present the Gospel according to Matthew as a book for

discipleship. The parable of the Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22:1-14) will be presented as a

critique to the Jewish religious leaders and also serves as an invitation for discipleship to the

church. This parable is also (differently) recorded in other gospel account; however, synoptic

issues will not be discussed intensively in this paper. Lastly, the implication of the parable to our

time will also be discussed.

II. The Book Setting

The book of Matthew provides geographical-biographical account of Jesus. 1 But it was

also written “to provide a catechetical manual for new converts or a scholastic manual for church

1
Joel B. Green, et.al., Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992),
529.

Page 3 of 23
leaders, or…for liturgical and homiletical reading in early church services.” 2 The recipient of the

book was the Jewish-Gentile church.3 But the first readers perhaps were the Jewish Christian

because of the inclusion of Old Testament references.4 The arrangement of the book is topical. 5

The Gospel according to Matthew was a collection of words (logia) of Jesus alluded with Old

Testament references. But it was explained that OT references are not primarily prophetic in

nature but only allusion to the words of Jesus added by the author. 6 The book of Matthew is

believed to be divided into “five discourses” or in “two major turning points.” It is also presented

in chiastic structure. But the most obvious pattern is the series of narrative and discourse block. 7

John Stott explained that “Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament”, “Jesus is the King,”

“Jesus is the Son of God,” “Jesus is the teacher (the Christ),” and “Jesus is the Savior (the Son of

Man)” are the Christ-centric themes of the Gospel according to Matthew. 8 “The Great

Commission” is also an important theme of the Gospel. 9 The Gospel also shows universality

because of the inclusion of Gentiles in the story (e.g. Magi, Centurion, Syro-Phonecian Woman,

etc.).”10

In this paper, it assumes that the Gospel according to Matthew is primarily written to

teach Jewish Christians. It is both historical and didactic. It is historical because it tells the story

and words of Jesus. It is didactic because it is purposely written to educate the readers. Its

2
Robert H. Gundry, A Survey of the New Testament (Manila: OMF Literature Inc., 1994), 162.
3
Frank Stagg, The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 8 (USA: Broadman Press, 1969), 61.
4
Donald A. Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13 (Dallas: Word Books Publisher, 1993),
lxiv.
5
Dr. Bruce H. Wilkinson, Walk Thru the New Testament (Atlanta: Walk Thru the Bible Ministries, Inc.,
1994), 23.
6
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13, xlii-xlvi.
7
Ibid., li-liii.
8
John Stott, Men With A Message: An Introduction to the New Testament and Its Writers (Suffolk:
Evangelical Literature Trust, 1994), 39-45.
9
Clinton E. Arnold, Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary, Volume 1 (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan , 2002), 8.
10
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13, lxvi.

Page 4 of 23
primary goal is to provide a model of discipleship to the Jewish Christians to reach out to the

Gentiles and to follow the teachings and lifestyle of Jesus Christ.

III. The Wider Context - “Jerusalem Receives and Rejects Her King (Mt. 19-25)”11

This block provides a natural geographical division. The setting happened when Jesus

was in Judea. This is the fifth block in a five-block narrative-discourse series in the book of

Matthew. This block is divided into two sub blocks, the narrative part (19-23) and the discourse

part (24-25). The context of this block is the “mixed responses to the Prophet who now presents

himself (Jesus) as the King, and the judgment of those who reject him.” 12 Series of “opposition

and discipleship” were prominent in this block. Along with are the discourse and judgment on

the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. 13 Jesus heavily expressed the meaning of kingdom of

heaven in His teachings when He was on his way to Jerusalem (ch.19-20). When Jesus entered

Jerusalem He was joyously welcomed and praised by the people. Then, He went to the temple

and there He encountered the chief priests and the elders of the people. Jesus told three parables

pertaining to the kingdom of heaven and to the chief priests and Pharisees (ch.21). Because of

this, they plotted to trap and test Jesus but He responded with wisdom and they were all silenced

(ch.22). Jesus declared His woes to the teachers of the law and Pharisees which corresponds to

the previous parables He told (ch.23). Jesus went to the Mount of Olives and privately told

prophecy to His disciples which pertains to the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age

(ch.24). Then He again told parables pertaining to the kingdom of heaven and the end of the age

(ch.25).

11
Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible Book by Book: A Guided Tour (Manila: OMF
Literature Inc., 2002), 275.
12
Ibid., 270.
13
Ibid., 275.

Page 5 of 23
 The parable of the Wedding Banquet (Mt. 22:1-14) is the last part of the “trilogy” 14 of

parables which pertain to the kingdom of heaven and to the religious leaders. 15 He talked about

the parable of the two sons and emphasized that those who responded to the preaching of John

would enter the kingdom ahead of them. Then He told the parable of the tenants and stressed that

the kingdom of God would be taken away from the religious leaders. Lastly, He told the parable

of the wedding banquet and conveyed that those who did not appropriately respond to the

invitation will be punished. “All three (parables) paint vivid pictures of sharply contrasting

responses to plain obligations, and in doing so they condemn disobedience or fruitfulness and

summon readers to unflinching self-examination.”16

IV. The Immediate Context – The Parable of the Wedding Banquet (Mt. 22:1-14)

The parable describes the kingdom of heaven to a wedding banquet. The king held a

banquet for the wedding of his son. The king sent his servants to the invited guest but they

rejected the invitation. The king sent more servants and became more specific with the content of

the banquet, but again they rejected the invitation and proceeded to their regular work. Some of

the invited guests killed the king’s servant. So, the king was furious and destroyed the invited

guests and their city. Then the king sent his servants again, this time to the street corners to invite

anyone they could find, both good and bad. The banquet hall was filled with guests. When the

king went closely to his guests, he noticed a man not wearing wedding clothes. The man found

no words to explain. The king ordered his servants to bind the man and be thrown into the

darkness. Then, a pronouncement, “for many are invited, but few are chosen.”
14
Frederick Dale Bruner, Mathew: A Commentary, Volume 2 (The Churchbook) (Grand Rapids: William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2007), 369.
15
Donald A. Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28 (Dallas: Word Books Publisher, 1993),
626-627.
16
Robert H. Smith, Augburg Commentary on the New Testament: Matthew (Minneapolis: Augsburg
Publishing House, 1989), 256.

Page 6 of 23
 The context of the parable is to explain the kingdom of heaven in relation to the response

of the Jewish religious leaders compared to the response of the common people (tax collector,

prostitutes, etc.) to the teachings of Jesus. The religious leaders rejected His teachings. On the

contrary, the common people were attracted to His teachings. The parable serves as a mirror to

the true condition of the heart of the Jewish religious leaders. This reveals their hardheartedness.

This also shows the universality, inclusivity, and exclusivity of God. The invitation of Jesus is

offered to all but He provides condition or qualification in entering the kingdom of heaven.17

In light of the context of the book, the passage serves as an eye-opener for the readers

about the inclusiveness of God. The kingdom of heaven is offered to all. The author of the book

wanted his readers (Jewish Christians) to learn that even sinners and Gentiles are invited to the

kingdom of heaven. It also serves as a warning for them not to live a life of mediocrity and false

religiosity (explicitly expressed in the seven woes); rather, to follow the teachings of Christ (e.g.,

kingdom lifestyle – The Beatitudes), which reflects the exclusivity of God.18

The parable characterizes discipleship as an important gauge in entering the Kingdom of

Heaven.19 It aims to believe that Jesus is the Rabbi, the Messiah, and the King. Moreover,

separation from God will definitely lead to eternal punishment.20

V. The Genre

17
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13, lix-lxxi.
18
Ibid., lix-lxxi.
19
Gundry, A Survey of the New Testament, 194.
20
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13, lix-lxxi.

Page 7 of 23
 The book of Matthew is generally accepted as a Gospel genre. 21 Gospel genre was

officially accepted as “a unique literary genre in the Graeco-Roman world” 22 Gospel means good

news.23 It tells the “teachings of Jesus and stories about Jesus.”24

Aside from the Gospel genre, Word Biblical Commentary also listed more specific

genres in the book of Matthew. The book was considered as “church correctives” because it

provided corrective teachings for the church during the time of the author. Some of the problems

were “materialism, secularism, and disregard of the law,” and also the “danger of becoming false

prophets or falling into hypocrisy.” The book is also “polemic against the rabbis” because “Jesus

debates and criticizes the Pharisees so frequently through the course of the Gospel which leads

naturally to the conclusion that the author and his reader face a continuing problem in their

defense of the gospel against the claim of the synagogue.” The book is also called as “ecclesial

gospel” because of the collection of “discourses particularly for the instruction and edification of

the Church.”25

Another prominent sub-genre within the Gospel genre is the Parable. Fee and Stuart

mentioned the most popular definition and interpretation of the parable. It was “considered to be

simple stories for those on the outside to whom the ‘real meanings,’ the ‘mysteries,’ were

hidden; these belonged only to the church and could be uncovered by means of allegory.”

However, they emphasized that “the keys to understanding the parables lies in discovering the

original audience to whom they were spoken.”26

21
Ibid., lvii.
22
Green, et.al., Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 276.
23
Lawrence O. Richards, Expository Dictionary of Bible Words (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1985), 376.
24
Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Manila: OMF Literature
Inc., 2003), 127.
25
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13, lvii-lxiii.
26
Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, 149-151.

Page 8 of 23
 One-third of the teachings of Jesus are comprised of parables. 27 According to the

Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, the parables of Jesus “are both works of art and the

weapons he used in the conflict with the opposition.” 28 It is explicitly expressed in the trilogy of

parables where parable of the Wedding Banquet was included. In view of the original hearers of

Jesus and in relation to the response of the Jewish religious leaders, the parable serves as an

invitation to the Kingdom of Heaven and a critique to the hard-heartedness of the Jewish

religious leaders, respectively. “Sometimes the parables have a polemical tone…to illustrate the

Kingdom of God.”29 The purpose of “the parables are to engage and instruct…. They hold up one

reality to serve as a mirror of…the kingdom of God…. Jesus told parables to confront people

with the character of God’s kingdom and to invite them to participate in it and to live in

accordance with it.”30 Thus, the parable serves as invitation for the readers of the book of

Matthew.

VI. Historical and Cultural Background

The key to interpret Mt.22:1-14 is to comprehend it in three levels. First, the time the

Gospel was written; second, the time Jesus spoke the parable; and third, the setting of the

parable.

Stagg believed that the Gospel according to Matthew was written before the destruction

of the Temple around AD 66-70. He explained that probably the Gentiles in the church were

increasing and the legalism of the Jewish Christian was impending. 31 It was supported by the
32
statement of Iraneus that the Gospel was written when Paul and Peter were still alive. A less
27
Green, et.al., Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 594.
28
Ibid., 591.
29
Ibid., 650.
30
Ibid., 596-597.
31
Stagg, The Broadman Bible Commentary, 61.
32
Arnold, Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary: Volume 1, 7.

Page 9 of 23
popular theory suggests that it was written around AD 80-85 to provide support to the fulfillment

of the prophecy of Jesus.33 Regardless of the date it was written, the greater concern is the

faithful passing on of the teachings of Jesus through oral tradition. Oral tradition did not cease

even after AD 70. Jesus insistently commanded His disciples to teach all that He taught to

them.34 It provides justification to the efficiency of transferring of Jesus’ teachings. Eventually, it

was put into writing.

The content of the Gospel itself suggests that the first readers are Jewish Christians. 35

Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary specifically mentioned that church at

Antioch in Syria is the original recipient of the Gospel because of its influence to Ignatius

(bishop of Antioch). This church is composed of “large Jewish-Christian and Gentile

contingent.”36 Stagg commented that the church might have experienced internal strife and

external pressures. Jewish Christians showed hostility to the Gentile converts, and some fell into

the trap of hypocrisy because of absolute neglect of the law. The church probably did not

associate anymore in the synagogue which caused confusion and division among the Jews. 37

Thus, “the church has consistently found in Matthew’s Gospel a call to a community that

transcends ethnic and religious barriers to find oneness in its adherence to Jesus.” 38 Matthew

fought against the arguments, pretensions, disbeliefs and misbehaviors, thus, “Gospel of

Matthew might be called an early Christian apology.”39

During the time of Jesus, the situation was more obvious. The book itself provides

sufficient information about the condition of the society and the community. We can see in Mt.

33
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13, lvii-lxxiv.
34
Ibid., lvii-xlix.
35
Ibid.,, lvii-lxiv.
36
Arnold, Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary, Volume 1, 7.
37
Stagg, The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 8, 61-62.
38
Arnold, Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary, Volume 1, 8.
39
J. D. Douglas, New Bible Dictionary (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), 751.

Page 10 of 23
22:1-14 and its surrounding text that the argument between Jesus and the Pharisees was at large.

According to the New Bible Commentary, the margins (poor, tax collectors, prostitutes, sick,

etc.) were oppressed because of excessive Roman and Herodian taxation, and heavily burdened

because of the extreme religious law imposed by the Pharisees. Pharisees were considered

minority group only. Yet, they had the authority to interpret and implement the Torah. The

emphasis of the Pharisees to the Torah was primary ethical and not theological which immensely

burdened the people and caused them so much oppression. Perhaps, that was the reason why

Jesus called them hypocrite (Mt. 23).40 However, the Pharisees were also afraid of the crowd

because of ‘pro-Baptist’ movement. Majority of the people believed that John the Baptist was a

prophet, thus, many responded to his invitation to repent.41

Jesus used parables in communicating His message. Compared to the Old Testament and

Inter-Testamental writings, the parables of Jesus were unique. 42 Jesus used traditional Jewish

customs in illustrating His stories which helped His listeners to comprehend it easily. Stagg

commented that the parable of the Wedding Banquet was the climax in the series of three

parables.43 In this parable Jesus compared the Kingdom of God to a king who prepared a

wedding banquet for his son. Evans and Porter described it, “well-to-do fathers and patrons were

known to invite large numbers of people, sometimes whole villages, to celebrations, including a

child’s wedding, refusal to come especially after responding positively to an invitation

constituted an insult.” 44 In this story it is very unlikely that the invited guest refused to attend or

even killed the king’s servant. The retaliation of the king while the banquet is on-going is also an

40
Ibid., 925.
41
R.V.G. Tasker, The Gospel According to St. Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1961), 203.
42
Green, et.al., Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 594.
43
Stagg, The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 8, 204.
44
Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter, Dictionary of New Testament Background (Downer’s Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 2000), 686.

Page 11 of 23
obscure event. But the king has the right to make military moves against the hostility of the

indignant guests. The king’s resolution is to invite all the people in the street corners. The

banquet hall was filled with guest. The idea whether a person is good or bad does not suggest

any connection with the custom. The king’s encounter with the man without wedding dress is a

parable within a parable, Stagg suggested.45 But, Hagner said that it was another parable

appended by the author.46 Barker commented that it is customary that a wedding dress is to be

provided by the host.47 Word Biblical Commentary remarked that “no particular garment used

only for celebrations is meant but that the reference is to the condition of the garment, washed

clean and white for the banquet.” 48 The custom does not employ exact details in illustrating the

kingdom of God. But provide specific point to understand its allusion to the kingdom of God.

The Kingdom of Heaven (God) is the central theme of Jesus teaching’s. 49 Ryken, Wilhoit

and Longman III explained, “when Jesus proclaims the kingdom of God, he evokes this complex

backdrop of Israel’s story and symbols….The coming climax of Israel’s hope is signaled and the

expectation aroused that Israel’s judgment will be ended, her sins will be forgiven, the enemies

will be subdued, and a renewed people will be gathered with the divine and kingly presence

returned to the sacred center of Zion. Kingdom of God is an emblem intricately interwoven with

Israel’s story and future hope.”50 Green and Mc Knight defined it as “God’s sovereign, dynamic

and eschatological rule. The kingdom lay at the heart of Jesus’ teaching….it denotes God’s

eternal rule rather than earthly kingdom, its scope was universal.” 51 Richards stated, that

“kingdom is realm in which a king exerts control and authority. The ‘kingdom of God,’ rather

45
Stagg, The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 8, 205.
46
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 628.
47
Kenneth Barker, NASB Study Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999), 1400.
48
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 205.
49
J. D. Douglas, New Bible Dictionary (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), 659.
50
Lelan Ryken, et.al, Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 479.
51
Green, et.al., Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 641.

Page 12 of 23
than being a place, is the realm in which God is in control.” 52 This serves as key meaning to the

parable.

VII. Grammatical Structure and Literary Analysis

Hagner explained that the parable of the Wedding Banquet is interrelated with the two

previous parables. The commentator believes that this parable is two appended parables. Verses

1-10 is parallel to the Luke’s version of the parable (Lk. 14:15-24), also to the Gospel according

to Thomas. Verses 11-14 probably came from other (Q) source. Discrepancy in character is also

obvious because in Luke’s and Thomas’ account the main character was a man, however, in

Matthew’s account it was a king. It was suggested that the story is altered to fit the point of the

author.53 But Tasker believes that “Jesus used the same theme (storyline)…to teach different

aspects of truth on what where entirely different occasions.” 54 Hagner proposed “euphonic,”

“syntactic parallelism,” and “parallel epexegetical” structures in this parable.55

(1) Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying:

Hagner suggested that the introduction “is apparently formulaic rather than actually

referring to the response or answer to those being addressed (v.1a).” “In parables” is also

formulaic in proving the plurality of the story, thus consist of two parables (1-10 & 11-14). 56

Hagner’s observation is proficient yet it does not provide significant value in interpreting the

parable. I agree with Fee and Stuart when they commented that parables of the kingdom are

“vehicles of the message, calling for response to Jesus’ invitation and call to discipleship.” 57
52
Richards, Expository Dictionary of Bible Words, 378.
53
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 626-627.
54
Tasker, The Gospel According to St. Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary, 206.
55
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 628.
56
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 629.
57
Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, 158.

Page 13 of 23
They also highlighted that “the point of the parable….is the urgency of the hour. The Kingdom is

at hand.”58 The parable does not give meaning through symbols, but a clear message.

(2) The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son.

It is true when Fee and Stuart commented that understanding the ‘hard sayings’ of the

Gospel lies with the understanding of the Kingdom of God. 59 They explained that “Jesus’

proclamation has twofold thrust: (1) Judgment is impending; disaster and catastrophe are at the

door. (2) But there is Good News: salvation is freely offered to all.” 60 I agree with Stagg’s

comment that the “king is the central figure” in the parable and it “has reference to God.” God is

the authority and he gives the invitation and permission to everyone to enter God’s Kingdom. 61 I

believe with Filson statement that “the wedding feast represents the joyous privilege of sharing

in the kingdom.”62 Also, with the comment of Evans and Porter that “the image of a great

banquet was often employed to depict both the abundance of the hope for future and ultimate

association of those chosen by God.”63 Likewise, with the comment of Guthrie and Motyer that

“the marriage feast gives the idea of the Messianic banquet.”64 Perhaps, the banquet does not

signify literal feasting but an allusion to the impending celebration for those who will respond to

the invitation of God.

58
Ibid., 159.
59
Ibid., 127.
60
Ibid., 158.
61
Stagg, The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 8, 204.
62
Floyd V. Filson, A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew (London: Adam and Charles
Black, 1971), 233.
63
Evans and Porter, Dictionary of New Testament Background, 144.
64
D. Guthrie and J. A. Motyer, New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1970), 843.

Page 14 of 23
(3-7) He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come,
4
but they refused to come. "Then he sent some more servants and said, 'Tell those who have

been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been
5
butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.' "But they paid no
6
attention and went off-- one to his field, another to his business. The rest seized his servants,
7
mistreated them and killed them. The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed

those murderers and burned their city.

I agree with Hagner’s assumption that the servants are allusion to the prophets and the

invited guests are the insolent Jewish people. Jesus’ accusation to the Pharisees in Mt. 23:30-31

provides a clear interpretation of the said assumption. However, Hagner also assumes that the

second group of servants is probably an allusion to John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and the

disciples. Too much detail is not helpful anymore in the interpretation of the parable. 65 If ever

granted, it provides no sense or appeals less to the original hearers of the parable. The first

assumption of Hagner is enough to establish the meaning of the parable. Most bible scholars

agreed that verse 7 is an allusion to the A.D. 70 destruction of the temple. Perhaps true, but

again, destruction is not the focus of the parable. Bruner’s statement provides better explanation.

He said that the king’s repeated invitation is a reflection of his patience to the invited guest to

come yet they are so unwilling.66 But for Filson, “the twofold sending of messenger means that

the Jewish people have had ample urgent summons to respond by repentance and faith.” 67

Bruner’s and Filson’s comments are invitational rather than judgmental which reflects the true

image of God as a king. However, the king’s response against the hostility of the invited guests

shows that the king is in control and his authority rules and reigns.

65
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 629-630.
66
Bruner, Matthew: A Commentary, Volume 2 (The Churchbook), 387.
67
Filson, A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew, 233.

Page 15 of 23
(8-10) 8 "Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did
9 10
not deserve to come. Go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.'

So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, both good

and bad, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.

Now, the king opens his invitation again. The wedding banquet is still ready and those

who were initially invited were not welcomed anymore. This time all people, both and good and

bad are invited. Hagner suggested that the servants were probably instructed to go to the

boundary roads instead of the literal ‘street crossings.’ I also agree with his comment that the

good and the bad are not the Gentiles and Jews, rather, the righteous and the unrighteous

people.68 But Bruner is more emphatic, he says that verse 10 “points to the gratuity of the gospel,

its grace and nondiscrimination, its distinctive openness to outcast and failures, to problem

people and the unimpressive.”69 It shows that the king does not show partiality in terms of ethical

status of the people. His kingdom is inclusive. This is good news to the hearers of this parable. I

believe that inclusiveness is an attitude and not a moral standard. Providing equal opportunity to

all people to respond to the invitation of the king is very important.

11
(11-12) "But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not
12
wearing wedding clothes. 'Friend,' he asked, 'how did you get in here without wedding

clothes?' The man was speechless.

The purpose of the second pericope of the parable is “to emphasize the very great

importance of righteousness for those who would enter the kingdom” 70 The king started to

68
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 630.
69
Bruner, Matthew: A Commentary, Volume 2 (The Churchbook), 389.
70
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 631.

Page 16 of 23
become personal. He approached a man in a very respectful way and ask about his wedding

clothe. According to Hagner, “the man could also represent the Jewish leadership who decline

the invitation…who is not properly clothed.” 71 But this statement quite contradicts the statement

of the king in verse 8. Hagner also mentions that the ‘wedding garment’ is a metaphor for

righteousness, which is more sensible.72 Tasker supports it and states that “the wedding garment

is usually interpreted by Protestant exegetes as a reference to the robe of righteousness-Christ’s

righteousness which the Christian can put on by faith.” 73 Gundry’s explanation is more realistic,

he stated that the “wedding feast represents false and true disciples (22:10), and the man not

wearing a wedding garment stands out as representative of the false. A wedding garment is

probably a newly washed garment symbolizing good works as proof that one’s discipleship is

true.”74 Barker commented that “the failure of the man in question to avail himself of a wedding

garment was therefore an insult to the host, who had made the garment available.” 75 But Stagg

explained that “this man defiled that authority in a more arrogant way, by trying to attend on his

own terms.”76 Bruner explained that “‘a wedding garment’ in the context of Matthew’s Gospel is

not passive, imputed (Pauline) righteousness; it is active, moral (Matthean) righteousness; it is

doing God’s will, it is an evidence of repentance by a law-abiding discipleship. But neither this

nor any wedding garment is a dreary legalism….It should be noted that the wedding garment of

personal righteousness was not necessary in order to be invited to the party…but the garment of

personal righteousness is necessary to stay in the party.” 77 Most commentators believe that the

wedding garment signifies righteousness which justifies obedience to God. Righteousness can

71
Ibid., 631.
72
Ibid.
73
Tasker, The Gospel According to St. Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary, 208.
74
Gundry, A Survey of the New Testament, 194.
75
Barker, NASB Study Bible, 1400.
76
Stagg, The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 8, 205.
77
Bruner, Matthew: A Commentary, Voume 2(The Churchbook ), 390.

Page 17 of 23
only be realized in true discipleship. Those who will respond to the invitation must be found

worthy by being a true disciple of Christ-wearing the garment of righteousness.

(13) 13 "Then the king told the attendants, 'Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into

the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

According to Gundry, “the king’s inspection represents the Last Judgment.” 78 Those who

failed to show righteousness will be punished. The intention of the verse is not to terrorize, but to

incite urgency for the readers and the hearers of the parable to respond to the invitation and to

live a life of righteousness. Impending punishment is nothing compared to the long patience and

opportunity given by God to the people to respond to His invitation. So, when the punishment

comes, no reason can be made. Unrighteous and wicked people will be eternally separated from

the kingdom of God.

(14) 14 "For many are invited, but few are chosen."

The parable is concluded by this verse. Gundry explained that “the many who are called

are the masses in a large, mixed church; the few who are chosen are those found to be true.” 79

His explanation is vague because the meaning of the word true is not quite enough. Hagner,

remarkably explained that the “Semitism meaning” of the verse is “all are invited” and not all are

approved. He added that human responsibility is imperative in sustaining his inclusiveness of the

elect. Becoming an elect is to respond to God’s invitation to live in righteousness, thus, to

become a true disciple of Christ.80 “Proper behavior is evidence of being chosen.”81 It is both

privilege and responsibility. Kaiser expresses that salvation is offered to all but some will not
78
Gundry, A Survey of the New Testament, 194.
79
Gundry, A Survey of the New Testament, 194.
80
Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28, 632.
81
Barker, NASB Study Bible, 1400.

Page 18 of 23
receive it because of human’s sinfulness and profanity.82 Bruner exclaims, “‘called’ means taking

up the initial invitation, ‘chosen’ means persevering to the end.”83

VIII. Summary/Conclusion

The Gospel account of Matthew was the well-accepted writing in the early church

because of the teaching and apologetic content it serves. As the Gentile mission progressed, the

Gentiles convert also increased in the church. Conflict however was unavoidable because of

cultural differences between the Gentiles and the Jews. The rise of the church, perhaps, is the

realization of kingdom of God on earth. It created culture shock for the Jewish converts as they

left their synagogues and joined the church meetings. Some legalistic Jewish Christians carried

on their old practices to their new found faith and tried to impose them to the Gentile converts.

Some Jewish Christian deliberately and completely left their old religious beliefs and practices

and abused their liberty. Some questioned Christ authority. The gospel provided answers to the

concern of the early Christian church. It paved the way for the church to incarnate Christ’s

teachings in them through discipleship.

The Pharisees neglected Jesus’ teachings. The invitation was offered to them but they

remained unresponsive. The parable of Jesus serves as invitation not only for the Jewish people

to turn back to God but also for the margins and the Gentiles to enter the kingdom. Though the

parables may imply prophecy and judgment, for the seeker it serves as an invitation to enter the

kingdom. Thus, it is a pronouncement of grace rather than judgment. Jesus was fully aware of

the social and spiritual condition of the Jewish people. He came to save them, but those who did

not respond declared their self-condemnation already. Jesus not only provided a way to the

82
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., et.al., Hard Saying of the Bible (Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 394.
83
Bruner, Matthew: A Commentary, Volume 2 (The Churchbook), 392.

Page 19 of 23
kingdom, but also a way for discipleship. He provides a way for people to enter the kingdom of

God (through saving grace) and be discipled (through the church).

The Parable of the Wedding Banquet is a more direct invitation of God to the Jewish

people and to all people. God still opens his invitation to all regardless of their sins and flaws.

God is patiently waiting for many people to accept his invitation. The banquet is extended. The

servants are calling. But when the full consummation of celebration begins, the true condition of

the heart will be revealed. Those who respond but do not show righteousness will eternally be

separated from the kingdom of God. Only those who respond to righteousness will be chosen.

Only those who choose to live in obedience to the will of God will receive a privilege to partake

in the grand celebration in the kingdom of God.

IX. Application

Our church must realize the importance of the Gospel according to Matthew. The Gospel

serves as an invitation to discipleship and righteousness for the church. Righteousness can only

be achieved through correct discipleship. There is no true discipleship unless it incarnates the

teachings of Christ. The author of the Gospel shows faithfulness to the commission to “go and

make disciples.” The intention of the Gospel is to mobilize believers to respond to the invitation

of Jesus Christ to partake in the kingdom, not only to join the kingdom through the church but

also serve the kingdom by continually inviting people. Church is the representation of God’s

Kingdom on earth. Many are coming to the church but not many are living in righteousness. The

parable of the Wedding Banquet implies call for discipleship to the church to attain

righteousness. The church must take it seriously. Because it is explicitly implied that not all who

come to the church will be chosen. Those who are not chosen are disqualified because they did

Page 20 of 23
not exemplify righteousness. The call now for us is to be serious in actualizing the Great

Commission – to invite as many as we can in the kingdom and train them for righteousness

(discipleship). So, when the final judgment comes, we will become worthy to eternally partake

of God’s kingdom.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arnold, Clinton E. Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Vol.1. Michigan:

Barker, Kenneth. NASB Study Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.

Bruner, Frederick Dale. Matthew: A Commentary, Volume 2 (The Churchbook). Grand Rapids:

Page 21 of 23
 William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004.

Douglas, J. D. New Bible Dictionary. Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982.

Evans, Craig A. & Stanley E. Porter, Dictionary of New Testament Background. Downer’s
Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000.

Fee, Gordon D. & Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible Book by Book: A Guided Tour.
Manila: OMF Literature, 2002.

___________________________. , How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. Manila: OMF
Literature Inc., 2003.

Filson, Floyd V. A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew. London: Adam and
Charles Black, 1971.

Gundry, Robert H. A Survey of the New Testament. Manila: OMF Literature Inc., 1994.

Guthrie, D. & J. A. Motyer. New Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1970.

Green, Joel B., Scot McKnight, I. Howard Marshall. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels.
Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992.

Hagner, Donald A. Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 1-13. Dallas: Word Books Publisher,
1993.

_______________. Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28. Dallas: Word Books Publisher,
1993.

Kaiser, Jr., Walter C., Peter H. Davids, F. F. Bruce. Manfred T. Brauch. Hard Saying of the
Bible. Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

Richards, Lawrence O. Expository Dictionary of Bible Words. Grand Rapids: Zondervan

Ryken, Leland, James C. Wilhoit, Tremper Longman III. Dictionary of Biblical Imagery.
Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1998.

Smith, Robert H. Augburg Commentary on the New Testament: Matthew. Minneapolis:

Stagg, Frank. The Broadman Bible Commentary, Volume 8. USA: Broadman Press, 1969.

Stott, John. Men With A Message: An Introduction to the New Testament and Its Writers.
Suffolk: Evangelical Literature Trust, 1994.

Page 22 of 23
Tasker, R.V.G. The Gospel According to St. Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary.
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1961.

Wilkinson, Dr. Bruce H. Walk Thru the New Testament. Atlanta: Walk Thru the Bible
Ministries, Inc., 1994.

Page 23 of 23