12
Israel's leaders, reveals their delusional presumption of taking Jesus' place of authority, as
heir and son in the parables' logic, but also argues the leaders will be punished and
replaced. If Jesus had argued enthymematically, the leaders could have flatly denied they
were unrighteous and abusing their authority. However, since Jesus cleverly made them
render judgment on the characters in the parable, they fell into self-indictment.
43
Jesus
found that the Jewish hierarchy had no claim to jurisdiction (that is, authority) due to their
spiritual and moral bankruptcy (21:28-32). Not only are their claims of jurisdiction
illegitimate, but also here Jesus pronounces that they will be punished, destroyed, and
replaced. In verse 43, He boldly declares, "
dia; tou`to levgw uJmi`n o{ti ajrqhvsetai ajf j uJmw`n
hJ basileiva tou` qeou` kai; doqhvsetai e[qnei poiou`nti tou;" karpou;" aujth`
"!"
44
They have
abused their authority and have been spiritually unfruitful. In essence, Jesus was saying
that God's forbearance was vanishing and that He would soon declare war on them.
In the third parable about the great banquet, 22:1-14, Jesus again parabolically
portends a violent destruction on Israel's leaders "by the kings armies" (22:7), but also in
the picture of the man found at the banquet without wedding clothes (v11-12) he
pronounces a warning to the people of Israel for the one who profess Messiah, gets close
to Messiah, but never really knows him.
45
Thus Israel at large is warned with the maxim, "
polloi; gavr eijsin klhtoiv, ojlivgoi de; ejklektoiv
."
Round two: Taxes and God 22:15-22.
The context of the Temple conflict narrative has thus far made it clear why the
Sadducean priestly aristocracy opposed Jesus. They hated Him because he undermined
their institutional reputation and power. There has been nothing within this rhetorical unit
Psalm 118:22-23 as proof that they are wicked and guilty like the tenants in the story. For in the light of the
Psalm, they are wickedly rejecting Jesus the Messiah as the builders did the capstone.
43
Roland Grams, "The Temple Conflict Scene: A Rhetorical Analysis of Matthew 21-23," In
Persuasive Artistry: Studies in New Testament Rhetoric in Honor of George A. Kennedy, ed. D. F. Watson,
JSNT Sup. Series no. 50 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 53-55.
44
Jews of the day knew the vineyard referred to Israel in line with Isa. 5:2; Ezek. 17:6; Hos. 9:10 and
many rabbinic parables as well. See Keener, 510. The replacement of the wicked tenants points the
replacement of the Israel's leadership by the Twelve and Messiah's church. See Bock, 326.