Alyssa Provencio

Dr. Osheim

God’s Literature

Final Paper: Mt. 20:1-16

In Matthew 20:1-16, the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, the thesis that seems to

come through from the message of the passage is two-fold. The first part of the thesis is that in

order to be granted eternal life in the kingdom of heaven, one must practice a material generosity

analogous to the generosity God demonstrates, especially to those most in need. The second part is

that envy toward the good gain of others and perceiving oneself as more deserving or entitled

results in a distance from God, but does not exclude one from His generosity. According to the

thesis, the moral message from this passage is that as children of God, we ought to practice

generosity in the giving of our time and possessions to others, especially to the marginalized and

those in need. We must not be envious of what others receive out of our own sense of entitlement

and greed. In contemporary culture, this message translates to the “qualities” college students are

encouraged to develop in order to be successful: worldly success is often viewed as a result of

self-advocacy and self-interest, which has the potential to lead to greed and the belief that we are

deserving of material success. Instead of gifting the fruits of success to others, it is often the less

fortunate who practice greater generosity. Status today seems to be defined by how much one has,

not by how much they give. According to Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 20:1-16, generosity should

take precedent over envy and will be rewarded with eternal life.

The parable of the laborers in the vineyard follows a passage in which a rich young man

approaches Jesus inquiring about the means through which he might achieve eternal life. Jesus

responds telling him to follow the commandments, and the young man claims he already does.

Jesus then tells him to give up all his possessions, but the young man walks away disappointed
because he cannot do so, as he is too attached to his riches. The parable is then articulated by Jesus

in order to teach the disciples about the importance of generosity and the dangers of greed and

envy. In the parable, God is paralleled to a wealthy landowner who goes out at several times

throughout one day and hires workers to work in his vineyard for one day’s wage to which they

agree. When it comes time to pay the workers, he pays those who were hired last, first, and those

who were hired first, last. The workers paid last were upset and envious of the workers paid first

because both were paid the same amount although the first group hired worked more hours. The

landowner explains that he can do as he pleases with his own wealth – the workers should not be

envious of his generosity.

In order to better understand the message of the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, the

word “generosity” must be defined and evaluated in the historical context of the passage.

According to The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, “generous” comes from the Hebrew

word “hanan”, meaning “especially to deal graciously with the needy but undeserving”.1 The

“undeserving” may refer especially to the workers hired in the eleventh hour who may not

necessarily deserve an entire day’s wage because of the limited amount of time they worked.

Therefore, the eleventh hour workers “have to recognize their hiring for what it is: a manifestation

of the goodness of the householder… they have to count on the goodness of others and of God…

consequently they are not alienated from God”.2 We are connected to God because we are

dependent on receiving his grace and generosity, of which we are undeserving. Conversely, Jesus

calls for his followers to act out of generosity in a manner that mirrors that of the landowner in

1
R.J. Hughes III, “Generous,” in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, ed. Geoffrey
Bromiley (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982), 431.
2
Daniel Patte, The Gospel According to Matthew (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1987), 278.
that we should give of our possessions to those in need. The Father gave up his only son for the

salvation of the world – we are simply called to give up our material treasures.

In Matthew 20:15, the landowner says to the frustrated workers who are paid last, “‘is it

not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious because I

am generous?’” A contextual understanding of the use of both “envious” and “eye” in this verse

are important to the overall understanding of the passage. “Envy” comes from the Greek

“poneros”, which means “full of labours, annoyances, hardships; pressed and harassed by

labours”.3 The workers hired first were envious of those hired last because although the first

workers were harder pressed by labor, the last workers were paid the same amount. According to

this definition, the envy displayed by the workers hired first seems to be justified by their labor.

The word “eye” in this verse is a translation of the Greek word “opthalmos”, metaphorically

meaning “the eyes of the mind, the faculty of knowing”.4 In looking at the metaphorical meaning

of “eye” in relationship to the definition of “envy” in this verse, the envy of the first workers

comes from their exposure to labor in that laboring is all they know, and their perception of the

worth of their labor is formed by this faculty of understanding. They perceive themselves to be

more deserving of a full day’s wage than the last workers because they were pressed by more

hours of labor. Despite the workers’ perception of the wage they deserve, the generosity of the

landowner is gifted equally to each of the workers regardless of the amount of labor they

contributed that day. From this, we gather that “the main teaching is indeed about how God

3
“Envious,” Strong’s Bible Concordance, accessed October 16, 2018,
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4190&t=RSV.
4
“Eye,” Strong’s Bible Concordance, accessed November 24, 2018,
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=G3788&t=NASB.
rewards human beings according to his unexpected goodness”.5 In terms of receiving eternal life,

the mindset of deserving salvation does not necessarily mean it will not be granted, rather that

envying the salvation of others is what drives people away from God and makes them “last” to

receive salvation.

According to the exegetical analysis of Matthew 20:1-16, the implied moral message is

that followers of Christ ought to practice generosity in that we must be willing to give of our

material possessions to others, especially to those in need and those who exist on the margins of

society. In addition, we must not be envious of the good gain of others as a result of our own sense

of entitlement and greed. In the context of the contemporary world, the moral message of this

passage can be translated and applied to the development of certain qualities in college students

and to those striving for the “American Dream” in general – we are taught that worldly success is

a result of self-advocacy and self-interest, which often leads to greed and a sense of entitlement to

success. Instead of the “successful” giving the fruits of that success to others, it is often the less

fortunate who practice greater generosity. Today, status is defined by the material goods one

possesses, not by the amount of their livelihood that they are willing to give.

According to an article titled Dispositional Greed, greed is defined as the “tendency to

always want more and never being satisfied with what one currently has”.6 Greed is viewed as a

helpful attribute in today’s society. It is the source of ambition that drives our economy.7

Contemporary culture is cultivating greed in the world by encouraging consumerism and teaching

young people to seek success, which is defined most commonly today by the monetary value we

5
W.D. Davies and Dale Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997),
76.
6
Terri G. Seuntjens, Marcel Zeelenberg, de Ven van, and Seger M. Breugelmans, “Dispositional Greed,”
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 108, no. 6 (June, 2015): 917.
7
Ibid.
hold in our bank accounts and put toward our material possessions. We are taught a specific

picture of success from a very young age – it is depicted as a stable career, a big house, a nice car,

and the best clothes. In order to have the “best” material goods, we must compare our possessions

to the possessions of others, which results in feelings of envy toward those who may have more

than we do. Because we are raised with the expectation of becoming “successful”, we feel entitled

to this sense of success and are even more envious of those who seem to have reached it if we do

not achieve exactly what we thought we should have received. Thus, greed is most clearly

associated with being self-interested, maximizing opportunities, feeling envious, and being

materialistic, all of which are encouraged in today’s society.8 Unlike the message in the parable of

the laborers in the vineyard, society teaches us that “greed is good”.9 This is problematic for

Christians today because if one is striving to live a moral life by attempting to mirror the

generosity of God as demonstrated in the parable, contemporary culture may condemn that person

and they could be deemed an outcast.

In a study conducted by Kurt Gray and colleagues, the tendency of middle to upper class

individuals toward generosity was compared to their tendency toward greed. The results showed

that true generosity is reciprocated less than greed in today’s society.10 When someone is a

recipient of generosity, they are less likely to reciprocate the act, and when they do, it is often

reciprocated on a much smaller scale than the original act. On the contrary, when an individual is a

victim of an act of greed, that individual will almost certainly reciprocate the act, but on a much

larger scale.11 This portrays the permeation of greed throughout culture today and proves the lack

8
Ibid, 919.
9
Ibid, 930.
10
Kurt Gray, Adrian F. Ward, and Michael I. Norton, “Paying it Forward: Generalized Reciprocity and the
Limits of Generosity,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 143, no. 1 (February, 2014): 252.
11
Ibid.
of generosity, however, this also seems to be an issue that echoes throughout the generations, as

Jesus was preaching about the importance of generosity in the gospel of Matthew. The wealthier

classes have always struggled with the concept of generosity and hold tightly on to their

possessions, which could be a result of the values these individuals are taught in contrast to the

values of the lower classes who live in poverty and must rely on the generosity of others.

Despite the cultural epidemic of greed society is facing today and the disappointing results

of the study conducted by Gray and colleagues mentioned above, the marginalized seem to best

imitate the generosity of God portrayed by the landowner in Matthew 20:1-16. According to Paul

Pitt, “upper class individuals reported social values that prioritized their own needs, whereas lower

class individuals expressed more concern for the welfare of others”.12 Those who belong to a

lower economic status are often perceived as being “less fortunate” than the majority.13 They are

viewed as having fewer economic resources, less access to social institutions (such as higher

education), and as being at a greater risk of victimization of crime.14 Although these restrictions on

the lifestyle of those living in poverty may be true, the current study yields results that show the

impoverished population giving more to others in need than those who belong to the upper and

middle classes. “Despite their reduced resources and subordinate rank, lower class individuals are

more willing than their upper class counterparts to increase another’s welfare, even when doing so

is costly to the self”, which may be the result of solidarity.15 Those who experience times during

which they must rely on the generosity of others are more inclined to reciprocate that generosity to

others who are also experiencing hardship.

12
Paul K. Pitt, et al., "Having Less, Giving More: The Influence of Social Class on Prosocial
Behavior," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99, no. 5 (November, 2010): 783.
13
Ibid, 771.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid, 782.
 The conclusions of the aforementioned study are exemplified in Luke 21:1-4 when Jesus

witnesses a poor woman giving all she has as an offering at the temple treasury, whereas the

wealthy are contributing only a portion of their possessions. Jesus condemns them because the

woman donated her livelihood and thus gave a greater contribution than the others, even though

the actual value of her gift may have been less. The poor woman exhibited greater generosity than

those who had much more, and thus is an example of the generosity Jesus teaches about in the

parable of the laborers in the vineyard. The wealthy at the temple are an example of greed because

they were not willing to give generously of their many possessions despite their wealthy status.

According to the results of the study conducted by Pitt and colleagues as well as the

example of generosity despite poverty in Luke 21:1-4, in order for an individual to be inclined

toward generosity as opposed to greed, one may have to suffer from poverty themselves or from

some hardship in which they must rely on the generosity of others. This also echoes the message

in Patte’s commentary – in relying on the goodness of others and of God, we are not alienated

from God, but rather engaged in a closer relationship to him.16 Through experiencing a need for

receiving generosity, we feel closer in relationship to those who are in a similar situation, and we

wish to show them generosity in order to alleviate some of their suffering, even if at a cost to

ourselves. We are called to live in solidarity with those in need and be generous to them, as we

ourselves have been shown generosity from God. We are not deserving of this generosity, yet God

continues to give to us, much like the landowner gives an equal wage to each worker despite how

long they worked or how much envy they held in their hearts.

16
Patte, The Gospel According to Matthew, 278.
 Bibliography

Davies, W.D. and Dale Allison. The Gospel According to Saint Matthew. Edinburgh: T&T Clark,

1997.

Gray, Kurt, Adrian F. Ward, and Michael I. Norton. "Paying it Forward: Generalized Reciprocity

and the Limits of Generosity." Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 143, no. 1

(02, 2014): 247-254.

Hughes III, R.J. “Generous.” In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, edited by

Geoffrey Bromiley, 430-431. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982.

Patte, Daniel. The Gospel According to Matthew. Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1987.

Pitt, Paul K., Michael W. Kraus, Stéphane Côté, Bonnie Hayden Cheng, and Dacher Keltner.

"Having Less, Giving More: The Influence of Social Class on Prosocial

Behavior." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99, no. 5 (11, 2010): 771-784.

Seuntjens, Terri G., Marcel Zeelenberg, de Ven van, and Seger M. Breugelmans. "Dispositional

Greed." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 108, no. 6 (06, 2015): 917-933.

Strong’s Bible Concordance. “Envious.” Accessed October 16, 2018.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4190&t=RSV

Strong’s Bible Concordance. “Eye.” Accessed November 24, 2018.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=G3788&t=NASB