A CERTAIN MAN HAD TWO SONS

Now, our Lord tells two parables which are linked. The first con­cerns the ministry of John the Baptist and its results, and the second, His own ministry and its results, vv. 33-44.

The chief priests and elders, self-appointed defenders of spiritual orthodoxy, accosted Christ as He taught in the temple. Was His authority earthly or heavenly, and who had granted it? The Lord responded with a question probing their credibility as spiritual leaders. He would answer their question if they answered His. Was the authority of John the Baptist from heaven or from men? This presented them with a dilemma. They had rejected John’s ministry, as they were now rejecting Christ’s. Yet, if they admitted this, they would lose the respect of the people who regarded John as a prophet. They confessed that they had no answer. Having punctured their pretensions as spiritual guides, Christ now tells a parable which further emphasizes their guilt.

God sends workers into His vineyard to produce fruit for Himself. The two sons are representatives of the human race. The first son, with his initial rude refusal to work, pictures a bra­zen sinner openly flouting God’s law. The second son, in his emphatic reply, ‘I go sir’, betrays his self-importance. He is a type of the respectable hypocrite, for, despite a glib profession of obe­dience, he had no intention of keeping his promise.

The first son portrayed the publicans and harlots. Not being religiously inclined, they seemed unlikely to profit by John’s ministry. But, surprisingly, they did believe John. The second son pictured the leaders of the people who were religiously inclined. Yet they did not believe John, despite observing others repent, and despite his preaching ‘the way of righteousness’ which, as guardians of the law, was their proud boast. In His ‘punch line’ question, v. 31, ‘Whether of them twain did the will of his father?’, Christ forces them to declare their own guilt - ‘They say unto him, The first’. For if they were unable, or unwill­ing, to state the source of John’s authority, how could they be reckoned competent to judge the authority of One whom John stated was so much greater than himself?