The Sin of Entitlement

Good afternoon.

If you do have a Bible, turn to Matthew 20, and we're going to be reading Matthew 21 through 16. Whenever you have the passage open, go ahead and stand for the reading of God's word. Matthew 21. For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who went early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard.

And after agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into the vineyard. And going about the third hour, where he saw others standing idle in the marketplace. And to them, he said, you go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right, I will give you.

So they went. Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. And about the 11th hour, he went out and found others standing. And he said to them, why do you stand idle all day?

They said to him, because no one has hired us. He said to them, you go into the vineyard too. And when the evening comes, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, call to the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last up to the first.

And when those who hired about the 11th hour came, each of them received a denarius. Now, when those who hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius.

And on receiving it, they grumbled at the master of the house saying, these last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day in the scorching heat. But he replied to one of them, friend, I'm doing you no wrong.

Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?

So the last will be first, and the first will be last. This is the word of the Lord.

Amen.

Let's pray.

Lord, we do thank you for this opportunity to once again, to think about the scriptures you have given to us, which are life to us. Pray that you use your words to open our heart and open our eyes to ways in which we are prone to the sin of entitlement.

Lord, I pray that you help us to see the truths of scripture and to humble ourself in repentance where needed and to use your words to influence our friends in society, to help them to love you more and more every day.

Since then we pray, amen. You may be seated. Now in our country, there's been a great transition from talks of equality to talks of equity. So if you know anything about the foundation of our nation, our nation was built on this notion of equality.

And equality is a good concept that has plenty of application in the scriptures. God is a God who really has created all men as image bearers, and there's a very, very primary sense as image bearers of the God who made us, particularly related to some of the things that we're talking about.

There's a profound sense in which all of us stand equal as image bearers before our maker. You're obviously living in a society that takes that notion of equality and presses it in ways that haven't been intended by God, flattening out distinctions and differences among people, whether you're talking about different types of people or genders or whatever else you're talking about.

But certainly there's a lot that has been abused about the notion of equality, but certainly there is a faithful and a biblical concept of equality that's taught in the scripture. But recently, if you've paid attention at all to some of the social justice concerns that are happening in the world, we've transitioned away from talking about equality to equity, okay?

So a lot of the language today is the language of equity, about what's equitable over and against equality. And formally, these two things are different, okay? So equity is very different than the notion of equality.

So equality is the concept that everyone should be treated fairly according to the law. So equality, everyone should be treated fairly according to the law. Lady Justice, who is anthropomorphized in a statue form, at times she's often pictured as blind because she is no respecter of persons, so the rich should be treated to the same standard as the poor, that would be the classic notion of equality.

The classic notion of equality is it doesn't matter what the color of an individual, the gender of an individual, it doesn't matter who they are, their background, their socioeconomic standing. There should be laws, there should be laws that they're going to be held to, so you shouldn't give preferential treatment to a man over and against a woman in a court of law because of notions of equality.

Equality's good, right? You shouldn't show preferential treatment to a rich person over and against a poor because of equality. Both people should be held to the same standard of the law which is administered impartially.

That's all good, that's all wonderful, that's all great. Different types of people, ethnicity, should be held to the same standard of law because that's good, right? And that's right, and Lady Justice is blind and certainly the Bible talks over and over and over again about the importance of showing no partiality.

Everyone should be treated in terms of equality. Now, equity is a different concept. Those who are advocating equity are putting forward as a contrast to equality, okay? So equality is everyone is treated fairly according to the law.

Equity is adjusting shares to make sure that everyone is equal, okay? You understand the difference? Adjusting shares to make sure everything's equal. So most of your politicians today that talk about, when you think they're talking about equality, they're actually talking about equity and they talk about equity in a very direct and a straightforward way.

And some of this will be important later, but here's the concept. So in the classic example, and I say classic, but this is a few decades old at this point, in the classic example of equity, right? You might imagine an illustration that's often used.

So there's a group of people that are varying heights that are standing outside a fence to a baseball game. I mean, I think it's really funny you're talking about equity and you're talking about people who are not paying for the game, getting fair treatment to watch the game.

That's kind of funny when you think about it, but you have three people. You have a very tall man who looks like a father, you have a son who's a little bit younger, and then you have a son who's really small.

So with equality, like here's the way to understand the difference. With equality, everyone would get a box that's this tall because everyone gets the same box, right? Well, you could imagine what would happen.

So the dad would get that box and he would see over the fence higher, right? The second son would get the same box. He could barely see over the fence. The third son would get the same box and he would not be able to see over the fence at all.

So that would be equality, right? Everyone gets the same thing, same treatment according to law. Well, equity in social justice usage is adjusting shares to make sure everyone is equal. So for everything to be fair, if you're gonna think in terms of equity, this new word equity, what would need to happen?

Well, dad would get a smaller box. First son would get a little bit bigger box. Second son would get really big box because the goal is to make everyone the same, right? You understand the difference?

Goals make everyone the same. So this notion of equity is built on the philosophy of the outcomes need to be the same. So in order to have fair treatment, outcomes need to be the same. Does that make sense?

So you have to adjust what you give people to make sure that you have the same outcome. All right, so here's some quotes. That you should use, think about that analogy and think about the quotes. So here's Obama.

It's not class warfare to say that folks who are doing well in this economy should pay a little bit more to give a chance to everyone else. What is that talking about? Is that talking about equality or equity, right?

It's not class warfare to say that those doing well in this economy should pay a little bit more. So when you think about the talk of taxes, we're always talking about paying your fair share. And what fair means is not fair in terms of equality.

It's fair in terms of equity. Fair share means we need to make sure everyone's the same, right? Same outcome. Here's Kamala Harris in a campaign event in 2020. Equality suggests, oh, everyone should get the same amount.

The problem with that is not everyone's starting out from the same place, right? So you think about the kids in the analogy. It's about giving people the resources and support they need so that everyone can be on equal footing and then compete on equal footing.

So you hear the things there. Here's Bernie Sanders in his 2020 speech. Goal is not only equality of opportunity, but equity in results, right? So not just everyone gets the same opportunity. It'll ensure this equity of results.

People should not be condemned to a life of poverty because of the family they were born into, right? Or the neighborhood they live in. So that's Bernie Sanders. And so what's happened is over the course of, you know, past 60, 70 years or so, we've had plenty of entitlement programs that we've developed in our nation that are aimed at creating different outcomes, the same outcome for everyone.

That's the goal. And a lot of these outcomes have not worked. So here's Thomas Sowell on the quest for cosmic justice. One of the consequences of such welfare policies is that people do not develop the habit of working.

They become dependent on what they're given and thus come to view their dependency as a right. They've come to view their dependency as a right. Today we're gonna be talking about the sin of entitlement and we're gonna do so from Matthew 21 through 16.

And when you think about this passage, it really is important to think about the context that we're coming in. So part of what we're doing when we're doing a study on this topic in general is there is a context that this passage is put in and the passage itself, it starts out with a for.

And as the preacher joke always goes, whenever you see a for, you're supposed to ask what it's for. But that's certainly what you're supposed to do. And if you wanna know what the for there is for, so the text starts out with, for the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard.

You're supposed to ask, well, what is that for? Well, go back, go back a little bit and see. So in Matthew 19, 28, Jesus said to them, truly I say to you, in the new world, the son of man will sit on his glorious throne.

You who have followed me will also sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or land, for my name's sake, he will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life.

And here's the issue, but many who are first will also be last. When God comes and when God returns, there's not just going to be a simple reversal of outcomes, meaning the poor people in this life will be the rich people in heaven.

It's not just a simple reversal, but for many people, there will be a reversal, you understand? So looking at the language of passage, it says many who are first will be last and the last first, you understand?

So a dramatic example of this reversal in the Eschaton could be seen in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. So when you think about the parable of rich man and Lazarus, in Lazarus' life, he had bad things by comparison to the rich man.

You know, he used to sit at the gate of the master's house and the dogs would come and lick his sores and he'd eat the scraps that fell from the table. But there was a reversal in that he was actually a Christian who was saved, who will meet Jesus in paradise.

In paradise, he's comforted, whereas the rich man who had good things in life, he'll be tormented. And so that'll be the case. And so part of what we're talking about here when we're talking about principles of many who are first will be last and the last will be first is we're talking about principles of justice.

We're talking about principles of fairness. We're talking about principles of equality. We're talking about principles related to God's justice and mercy that are going to come to head into the parable that we're reading today.

So notice, I do wanna go through this parable and walk through some of the features of this parable. And it is, as I said, it is a parable that is about notions of fairness, equality, grace, mercy, judgment, et cetera.

So when you think about this parable, what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna walk you through quickly the structure of the parable, talk about things you already know. I'm sure all of you guys have heard this parable before.

I'm gonna talk you through the structure of it and then we'll talk about how we're applying it. So when you think about the nature of the story itself, Matthew 21 says this. For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyards.

So in the parable, God is playing the role of the master of the house. The master of the house loosely corresponds to God. He's playing the God role. You'll notice in verse two, there's an agreed upon wage.

So the master is hiring, he goes out early to hire laborers for the vineyard. He agrees upon a wage with these laborers for a denarius day. And he sent them to the vineyard to work. So first you see the agreed upon wage.

Second, you see that there are workers that are hired at different times. So there's workers that are hired at the third, the sixth, the ninth, and the 11th hour. So notice what it says. It says, going about, this is verse three, going about the third hour, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace.

And he said to them, go into the vineyard too. Whatever is right, I will give you. So they went. And then going in the sixth hour, the ninth hour, he did the same. So he hires the original workers, agrees upon them with a wage, a denarius day.

Then he continues going out in the marketplace at regular intervals. At the third hour, he hires more. At the sixth hours, he hires more. At ninth and 11th, he does the same. But notice what the language is in verse four.

He said to those at the third hour, he said, you go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right, I will give you. So pay attention to that. Pay attention to that. This is a parable about what is right.

This is a parable about what is just, right? This is a parable about equality versus equity. That's what it's about, do you understand? So whatever is right, he's gonna give you. He did the same to those at the sixth, the ninth, and 11th hour, he hires them, right?

So workers are hired at different times who will be paid what is right. Now notice in verse eight, there is a reversal in the expected pay order, right? So verse eight, when evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, call the laborers and pay them their wages beginning with the last to the first.

That's a reversal of what we would expect to happen, isn't it? So you would think that the workers who went out at the first hour would be paid first. You would think that the workers who went out at the 11th hour would be paid last, but notice there's nothing in the contract that says what order they're going to be paid in.

And if you think about the nature of the way that the law works, when you have a day laborer, and you have the money to pay them, you're supposed to pay them that day. That's what you're supposed to do.

So the law defines what is just. The law defines what is right. And what is right is that if you have a day laborer, you pay them that day. Now, I mean, I don't know if you guys have worked for employers who refuse to pay you on time, right?

Or they hire you for a project and then they never pay you, right? Or they have the money to pay you, you ask them, hey, when am I gonna get paid? Yeah, I'll get it, yeah, I'll get it, yeah, I'll get it.

And then you have to ask them three or four or five or 10 times to, when are you gonna pay me?

Right?

That is not a fun situation to be in, but here's the thing, like, here's the thing. The law demands that you pay your day laborers that day. Did the master pay the day laborers that day?

Yes.

Did he do what was right?

Yes.

Is he allowed to pay the last workers before the first?

Sure.

There's nothing in the contract that says he shouldn't, but there's a reversal in what we intuitively would expect to happen at this point. So the last, what happens then in verse nine is you see that the last workers are paid the rate that's agreed upon by the first workers.

So when the evening came, right, the owner of the vineyard said to the foreman, this is verse eight, call the laborers and pay them their wages beginning with the last after the first. So we see the reversal, and then it says in verse nine, and when those hired about the 11th hour came, each of them received a denarius.

So the natural question arises, if you're like a member of, if you're one of the first hour workers or the third hour worker or the sixth hour worker or the ninth hour worker, you're thinking, well, the 11th hour workers were paid a denarius.

I guess because I work longer, that means I'm probably going to be paid more. That would be the expectation that you might have. That would be the expectation that they had in the story. Now, the third hour, the sixth hour, and the ninth hour weren't told what they were gonna be paid.

They just told that what they were gonna be paid was right. You understand? So they weren't told. The first hour workers were told they were gonna get paid a denarius, but then they're obviously thinking in their minds, well, if you're paying the 11th hour worker who only worked one hour a denarius, you're probably gonna pay me more.

But what happened? So first hour workers, so last hour workers are paid the rate agreed upon by the first workers. Then in verse 10, the first hour workers get indignant and complain to the master because they see that they get the rate that they agreed upon.

They're not getting more. So verse 10, now when those who were hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius. And on receiving it, they grumbled at the master of the house saying, these last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.

So what's the nature of their complaint? Unfair treatment, right? Yes, a complaint about justice is a complaint about fairness. If you do more work, shouldn't you get paid more? That's the nature of their complaint.

Now, what's the problem? What's the problem here? The problem is the master paid them the rate that they agreed upon, didn't he? So he paid them the wage they agreed upon. He said, if you work for me for a day, I'll give you a denarius.

He gave him a denarius. So what we're talking about, we're not talking about an issue of justice or fairness. We're talking about an issue of generosity. And the thing about generosity is this. Generosity is not owed.

Generosity is not deserved. Generosity is not something that can be demanded. In fact, to demand generosity is to commit the sin of entitlement. Notice how he replies. He says, he applied to one of them, friend, I'm doing you no wrong.

Did you not agree with me for a denarius? The answer is yes. You agreed with me for a denarius. What did I give you? I gave you a denarius. Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you.

Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity? So the last will be first and the first will be last. That's the story. So what is the sin of entitlement?

Sin of entitlement refers to an attitude or mindset where a person believes that they inherently deserve certain privileges, rewards, or advantage without having earned or merited them. Entitlement is fueled by pride and gratitude, a lack of responsibility, resentment, and envy.

And I mean, you can see all these things coming to the forefront in the passage that we're thinking about today. I mean, the reality is that the master's money belongs to the master, doesn't it? If a master wants to hire one worker to work for one hour and give him a denarius and hire another worker to work for 12 hours and then give them a denarius, is he allowed to do what he wants to do with his money?

The issue is yes, he's allowed to do whatever he wants to do with his money. No one has a right to his money, do they? No one has a right to the master's money. I'm allowed to do the same thing with my money, aren't I?

If I wanted to hire one of you to come over and work at my house and I wanna pay you $100 to work on my house, I'm allowed to do that. And if you agree upon it and I need to give you your money the day that you work, that's what the Bible says I should do,.

I'm allowed to do that.

If I wanted to hire another of you for $1 ,000 to do the same exact job, am I allowed to do what I wanna do with my money? Thank you. I am, I'm allowed to do whatever I want to do with my money. Now, if you were the guy who was paid $100 and you came to find out that I paid someone else at the church $1 ,000, do you think you might be tempted to get a little bit indignant with me and ask me why I didn't pay you the $1 ,000, I only paid you the $100?

Well, the issue is you might ask me that, but what that reveals about the nature of your heart is that you expect certain things of me that you shouldn't expect, right? Like I'm allowed to do whatever I wanna do with my money,.

My money belongs to me.

So I'm allowed to pay one worker one wage if I want to, I'm allowed to pay another worker another wage. Justice isn't concerned with that because justice is concerned with the rate that is agreed upon, right?

So if I agree upon you for $100, you come and I give you $100, I've done no injustice to you. If I agree upon you a rate for $1 ,000, you do the same job, you come, you do your work, I give you your payment, justice has been accomplished.

Now the issue is that extra $900 I gave to the other person would probably be an act of generosity on my part to give to him and I'm allowed to be generous to whom I'm allowed to be generous. You're not owed my generosity, my generosity doesn't belong to you, right?

Generosity is not meant to be legislated, demanded by other people, it's something that's freely given. Here, as I said, I mean, sin of entitlement, it really is a grievous sin. It causes young people to go into credit card debt to achieve their parent's standard of living in the first years of being responsible adults.

You know, entitlement is, it prevents singles from getting married because they think they deserve a standard that's far beyond them. It causes children, children, it causes you to see the embitteredness towards your parents because you look and you see that other parents give their children privileges and possessions that your parents aren't giving you.

If you've ever been tempted to look at what another child has and compare that with what your parent has given you and been upset with your parents as a result of that, then you are guilty of this sin of entitlement.

It's ruined economies, destroyed legacies, it's brought enmity to families, and ultimately, it's destroyed souls. Sin of entitlement is a pretty grievous sin. So how do we fight it? How do we fight it, brothers and sisters?

Consider the cross. Consider the cross. This is a parable about the way the kingdom of heaven works. This is a parable about God's justice and God's mercy. This is a parable about the cross. The cross is obviously the great equalizer.

When you consider the cross, we all stand equally condemned before the cross, don't we? And when you think about the nature of condemnation, condemnation is not like a sliding scale kind of issue. Condemnation is like a light switch which you turn off and you turn on, okay?

So when you stand before a court of law, you're either gonna get one of two verdicts. You're going to get a guilty verdict or you're gonna get a not guilty verdict. That's a binary choice, right? That's a binary choice.

There's one of two choices. You're gonna get guilty or not guilty. If you get the guilty verdict, you stand condemned before the court of law. So what I'm trying to say is all of us, when we enter into the world, we enter into the world as death row inmates who stand condemned.

Everyone is equally condemned before God. That's not to say that everyone commits the same degree of heinous sin before God. Some people, they excel at sin a lot more than others, okay? Meaning this is a common misunderstanding that many people have about the nature of total depravity.

Total depravity, total in the sense of total depravity is talking about the comprehensiveness of the sin problem. So when we say sin, when I say that I'm totally depraved, what you should be hearing me to say is that every human faculty in me is affected and corrupted by sin.

So my depravity is total in terms of its extent. Do you understand? That means my mind, my will, my emotions, my affections, they're all corrupted by sin. Depravity is total in terms of extent, but what we're not saying when we talk about the doctrine of total depravity is depravity is total in terms of effect.

Like there are some people that God allows to give, there's some people that God gives over to greater sins, greater and greater and more sins than others. You understand? So, and in the afterlife, there is great indication that there will be greater punishments.

Like hell is not just the same for everyone. So Jesus will say this over and over again. It'll be more tolerable for you in the day of judgment than for Sodom and Gomorrah, right? So there are different, there's gonna be different degrees of punishment based on the nature of our sin.

Just like if you were in a court of law, there's greater sentences, right?

You understand?

Like some person could be sentenced for one year, some could be sentenced for two years, some could be sentenced for 10 years, but all of, everyone who's condemned is equally condemned. We come into the world equally condemned, all deserving of God's wrath, all deserving of hell.

The cross is a great equalizer in that effect. And when we think about the nature of the cross, that should humble us and remove from us much of our sin of entitlement. And this is really a parable about that in a lot of ways.

This is a parable about the nature of the cross and the nature of the afterlife. So we all stand equally condemned before the cross. That's the point. You also consider the nature, how do we fight this grievous sin of entitlement?

Consider the nature of generosity. In the parable, the workers all agreed upon a rate, and the last workers were given the same rate as the first worker. The fact that some workers were paid more shows that the master was being generous to them because they didn't deserve to be paid more.

That's the point. If you work for one hour and someone else works for the same hour, or someone else works for 12 hours doing the same job, you don't deserve to get paid the same rate of sin. That's the nature of how generosity works.

So every time, here's the thing, every time you decide to give charity to someone, you are doing so out of the kindness of your heart. Contrary to the politician quotes that we were given before, generosity really isn't something that's owed.

You live in a society that does not understand this and confuses this point at every conceivable point. You're trained to think that everyone deserves a college education. You're trained to think that everyone deserves, all orphans deserve parents.

You're trained to think that everyone deserves free healthcare. You're trained to think that everyone deserves free cell phones even. The internet is considered a basic right. So instead of, in the traditional sense, we used to think that people had negative rights, meaning like I have the right to not be killed by you.

We now think of rights in terms of positive rights. So you think that because something is helpful, everyone needs it. Well, the issue is everyone doesn't deserve a college education, do they? If you say that everyone deserves a college education, what you're saying is whoever is providing that college education to them is a slave.

You're making a demand on them to perform their service, aren't you? You say that everyone deserves, you say that everyone deserves basic healthcare. Well, you know what? For most of the history of the world, people didn't deserve basic healthcare, did they?

When we're talking about what people deserve, people don't deserve generosity. And you're living in a world that tries to police generosity and coercively use the state's power to force generosity on people.

So the nature of generosity is that generosity is not owed, it's a gift that should be given. It's interesting, we do the food pantry, and since I've been here, I've seen several emails from people who are complaining about the generosity that they are receiving from us.

And I think that's remarkable, considering the nature of the way generosity actually works. Consider the cross, consider the nature of generosity if you wanna fight this grievous sin. Consider the nature of salvation.

So when you think about the way that this parable works, this is an analogy, okay? I know that analogies have fallen on hard times among us today, but this analogy, and the way that analogies work is that you're not supposed to press every detail of the analogy to find a specific one-to-one correspondence from the thing compared to the thing that it's being compared to, okay?

So when you think about the way that analogies work, all analogies, by definition, are imperfect. Because when you're comparing two things, if I'm comparing two things, typically those two things are not exactly identical.

If they were exactly identical, I wouldn't have to use an analogy. But when I use an analogy, what I'm doing is I'm gonna show you the similarities between two things. And what you're supposed to think is, well, there's probably differences between them, too, because it's just an analogy, you understand?

So the way, like, when you live in a world that is kind of hostile to the use of analogies because we're hostile to the use of reasoning, and so what we often do when we encounter analogies is we police the analogies by pointing out the differences.

But what you're not supposed to do is that. I mean, what you're supposed to do when you think about this analogy is not think about the ways in which this situation is not analogous to salvation. You're supposed to think about the ways in which it is, okay?

So here's what happens when you don't do that. So consider the nature of salvation. In the parable, God's grace and his mercy is being compared to a worker who hires laborers. All right, if you're gonna treat this analogy in an inappropriate way, then what you're going to conclude, then, is that God gives grace and mercy to those who work and earn for it.

Do you understand? That would be a wrong interpretation of the analogy. That's not the point. The point of the analogy is just to tell you about something, how salvation works. Do you know that God saves some people very early in their life, and he saves some people really late in their lives?

And he gives them the same gift. He gives them adoption as sons. The meek will inherit the earth. If you're a Christian, you're gonna get the status of the son. You're gonna inherit the whole thing, right?

The whole earth is gonna belong to you because of by virtue of what Jesus Christ did for you. So here's the thing. God will save some people at the first hour. He'll save some people at the third hour.

He'll save some people at the ninth hour. He'll save some people at the 11th hour, right? God's mercy is differently given to different kinds of people. Now, atheists think that this is the fundamental and moral thing about the nature of the Bible and the nature of the gospel and the nature of the good news.

Atheists will lambast this kind of idea because they understand the entailments and they understand the significance of what we're talking about. So meaning, you're saying that I could be a child rapist, I could be a pedophile my whole life, I could be a serial killer my whole life, and then at the last moment, say I believe in Jesus or something, and then God would save me.

Atheists find that to be completely and totally reprehensible. They find that completely disgusting and horrible, the thought that God could save a person who's given themself over to so much sin. But then the issue is, God has saved people just like that, hasn't he?

And is it a matter of justice? Like if God only saved innocent people, he wouldn't save anyone, would he? Like that's the whole point. If God was trying to save innocent people, the issue is none of us are innocent.

We're all gonna get mercy, but God shows mercy to some by saving them early on in their life and sparing them and their family all the consequences of extended rebellion in the world, right? And God chooses to save others later after they live in depravity for much longer periods of time.

God's mercy and God's generosity is not the same in that way. You understand?

That's the point.

So you consider the nature of salvation. This is a metaphor that we're supposed to use to think about the nature of grace, to think about the nature of justice. So in the parable, all these workers are working, but you would be wrong to think they're working for their salvation and some work longer than others have worked for their salvation.

That would be an inappropriate use of the analogy. What you're supposed to do is you think about the nature of God's grace. God has given some people more grace than others. And I know that we don't often think about that,.

But it's true.

God has given some people more grace than others. And God has given different gifts to different people, hasn't he? So God tells you very intentionally that to one man, he gives 10 talents, and to another man, he gives five talents, and to another man, he gives one talent, and he expects you to do whatever, like the best that you can do with the talents, the resources, and abilities that he's given you.