Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 25:26
His lord answered and said unto him, [Thou] wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strewed:
Slothful – Indolent, lazy, who had done nothing. God will judge people not merely for doing wrong, but for not doing right. See Mat 25:45. That servant was wicked, because he had such an opinion of his master; he had shown that he was slothful by not making good use of the talent, Mat 25:27.
Thou knewest … – This should be understood, and might have been translated, as a question. If you knew that I was Such a man you ought to have acted accordingly, so as to have escaped punishment. Didst thou know that I reap, etc.? Then thou shouldst have given my money to the exchangers, etc. This is not intended to admit that he was such a man, but to convict the slothful servant of guilt and folly in not having been prepared to meet him.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
His Lord answered and said unto him,…. Resenting, as he well might, not only his indolence and sloth, his neglect of his duty, and his worldly disposition, but the abusive character he had given of him, in order to cover his own wickedness:
thou wicked and slothful servant; a very just character of him: he was a “wicked” servant; all men in a state of nature are wicked; they lie in wickedness, and are under the power of the wicked one; and there are many wicked men among professors of religion, and many wicked ministers, who, though not openly profane, yet either trusting to their works, or doing the work of the Lord deceitfully, or wholly neglecting it, justly merit this character. This man’s wickedness lay in his slothfulness, in not doing the good he might, and had gifts and abilities for; and in entertaining wrong thoughts of, and in bringing false charges against his Lord: and he might be truly said to be “slothful”; since he took no pains to improve in spiritual knowledge; and instead of digging for that, as for silver and hid treasure, dug in the earth, and hid his talent there: he neglected the gift that was in him; did not stir it up, or study to show himself a workman that needeth not to be ashamed; did not give himself up to reading, meditation, and prayer; but trusted to, and depended on what other men had done; stole away his neighbour’s words, reaped that for which he had not laboured, and entered into the labours of others; and being afraid of difficulties, indulged himself in ease and pleasure, served his own belly, and not the Lord Jesus; he gratified his worldly lusts, and had no regard to his master’s interest.
Thou knowest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed: not granting that he was such an one, and that his servant knew him to be such, and had given a true character of him; but supposing he was such a person he had wickedly represented him to be; he turns the argument upon him, that therefore he must needs know, that he expected to have had his money improved, and to have received it with an increase; and that upon such a consideration he ought to have been the more diligent and industrious, in using and improving his talent, and not to have indulged sloth, and idleness; and thus he convicts, judges, and condemns him, as a wicked, slothful servant, by his own words.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Thou wicked and slothful servant ( ). From (work, annoyance, disturbance, evil) and (to be slow, “poky,” slothful). Westcott and Hort make a question out of this reply to the end of verse 26. It is sarcasm.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Slothful. With no more trouble than he expended in digging, he might have gone to the exchangers. The verse should be read interrogatively, Didst thou indeed know this of me? Thou shouldst then have acted with the promptness and care which one observes in dealing with a hard master. To omit the interrogation is to make the Lord admit that he was a hard master.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
(26) Thou wicked and slothful servant.The words of the master pierce below the false excuse, and reveal the faults which had eaten like a canker into the mans heart and soul.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
26. Wicked and slothful servant The precise opposite of good and faithful. Wicked in self-exculpation, by calumniating his Lord. Slothful in neglecting his talent. Thou knewest The master echoes the culprit, in order to condemn him on his own grounds. It is best understood as an interrogation: “You knew I was a hard man, did you?”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“But his lord answered and said to him, ‘You wicked and slothful servant, you knew that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I did not scatter. You ought therefore to have put my money to the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own, with interest.”
But his Lord answered him in his own coin. In contrast with the ‘good and faithful’ servants, this servant had failed in his duty. He was the very opposite. He was a ‘wicked and slothful’ servant. His attitude was wrong, his heart was wrong, and he was lazy too. For he had himself admitted that he knew what was required of him, and indeed that it was his duty, and by his own admission he had refused to do his Lord’s will. The very minimum that he should have done was to invest the money so that it gained interest that he could hand to his Lord. All that the Lord had wanted was that he should do what he could. But he had refused to do even that, and that because of his wrong attitude towards his Lord.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 25:26 f. The master chastises the worthless and indolent (Rom 12:11 ) servant with his own weapons.
, . . .] question of astonishment , which is more spirited and more in keeping with the surprising nature of the excuse than to understand the words in a conceding sense (Kuinoel, de Wette), or as an independent hypothesis (Bernhardy, p. 385), in which case the of the apodosis would be deprived of its force (see Hartung, Partikell . II. p. 22 f.; Klotz, ad Devar . p. 718 f.).
.] flinging down upon the table of the money-changers , represents the indifference of the proceeding.
] is emphatic as related to the preceding , , Mat 25:25 . To it likewise corresponds , to which, however, is now added for sake of emphasis.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
Ver. 26. Thou wicked and slothful servant ] God puts no difference between Nequaquam et nequam, an idle and an evil servant. Had idleness been a calling, this servant had been both a good husband and a good fellow too. But what saith the heathen? Nec illi falsi sunt, qui diversissimas res expectant, ignaviae voluptatem, et praemia virtutis. (Sallust. in Jug.)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
26, 27. ] Luke prefixes , viz. ‘because, knowing the relation between us, that of absolute power on my part over thee, if thou hadst really thought me such an hard master, . . ., in order to avoid utter ruin. But this was not thy real thought thou wert . .’
The , &c. is not concessive, but hypothetical; God is not really such a Master.
. ] in Luke ( Luk 19:23 ) .
is interpreted (see ch. Mat 21:12 ) by Hesychius. There was a saying very current among the early Fathers, , which some of them seem to attribute to the Lord, some to one of the Apostles. It is supposed by some to be taken from this place, and it is just possible it may have been: but it more likely was traditional, or from some apocryphal gospel. Suicer, Thes., under the word, discusses the question, and inclines to think that it was a way of expressing the general moral of the two parables in Matt. and Luke.
But, in the interpretation , who are these ? The explanation (Olsh., and adopted by Trench, Parables, p. 247) of their being those stronger characters who may lead the more timid to the useful employment of gifts which they have not energy to use, is objectionable, (1) as not answering to the character addressed he was not timid, but false and slothful; and (2) nor to the facts of the case : for it is impossible to employ the grace given to one through another’s means, without working one’s self.
I rather take it to mean, ‘If thou hadst really been afraid, &c., slothful as thou art, thou mightest at least, without trouble to thyself, have provided that I should have not been defrauded of the interest of my money but now thou art both slothful and wicked, in having done me this injustice.’ Observe there would have been no praise due to the servant but would not have lost its . The machinery of religious and charitable societies in our day is very much in the place of the . Let the subscribers to them take heed that they be not in the degraded case of this servant, even if his excuse had been genuine.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 25:26 ( vide on Mat 6:23 ), wicked” is too general a meaning: mean-spirited or grudging would suit the connection better. is the fitting reply to , and the opposite of . You call me hard, I call you a churl: with no heart for your work, unlike your fellow-servant who put his whole heart into his work. , slothful; a poor creature altogether: suspicious, timid, heartless, spiritless, idle. , etc.: a question, neither making an admission nor expressing surprise or anger, but leading up to a charge of inconsistency = If that was your idea of me, why then, etc.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Matthew
TRADERS FOR THE MASTER
Mat 25:14 – Mat 25:30
The parable of the Ten Virgins said nothing about their working whilst they waited. This one sets forth that side of the duties of the servants in their master’s absence, and so completes the former. It is clearly in its true historical connection here, and is closely knit to both the preceding and following context. It is a strange instance of superficial reading that it should ever have been supposed to be but another version of Luke’s parable of the pounds. The very resemblances of the two are meant to give force to their differences, which are fundamental. They are the converse of each other. That of the pounds teaches that men who have the same gifts intrusted to them may make a widely different use of these, and will be rewarded differently, in strictly graduated proportion to their unlike diligence. The lesson of the parable before us, on the other hand, is that men with dissimilar gifts may employ them with equal diligence; and that, if they do, their reward shall be the same, however great the endowments of one, and slender those of another. A reader who has missed that distinction must be very shortsighted, or sworn to make out a case against the Gospels.
I. We may consider the lent capital and the business done with it.
The second lesson taught is that spiritual gifts are given for trading with. In other words, they are here considered not so much as blessings to the possessor as his stock-in-trade, which he can employ for the Master’s enrichment. We are all tempted to think of them mostly as given us for our own blessing and joy; and the reminder is never unseasonable that a Christian receives nothing for himself alone. God hath shined into our hearts, that we may give to others the light of the knowledge which has flashed glad day into our darkness. The Master intrusts us with a portion of His wealth, not for expending on ourselves, but for trading with.
A third principle here is that the right use of His gifts increases them in our hands. ‘Money makes money.’ The five talents grow to ten, the two to four. The surest way to increase our possession of Christ’s grace is to try to impart it. There is no better way of strengthening our own faith than to seek to make others share in it. Christian convictions, spoken, are confirmed, but muffled in silence are weakened. ‘There is that scattereth and yet increaseth.’ Seed heaped and locked up in a granary breeds weevils and moths; flung broadcast over the furrows, it multiplies into seed that can be sown again, and bread that feeds the sower. So we have in this part of the parable almost the complete summary of the principles on which, the purposes for which, and the results to faithful use with which, Christ gives His gifts.
The conduct of the slenderly endowed servant who hides his talent will be considered farther on.
II. We note the faithful servants’ balance-sheet and reward.
The verbatim repetition of the same words to both servants teaches the great lesson of this parable as contrasted with that of the pounds, that where there has been the same faithful work, with different amounts of capital, there will be the same reward. Our Master does not care about quantity, but about quality and motive. The slave with a few shillings, enough to stock meagrely a little stall, may show as much business capacity, diligence, and fidelity, as if he had millions to work with. Christ rewards not actions, but the graces which are made visible in actions; and these can be as well seen in the tiniest as in the largest deeds. The light that streams through a pin-prick is the same that pours through the widest window. The crystals of a salt present the same facets, flashing back the sun at the same angles, whether they be large or microscopically small. Therefore the judgment of Christ, which is simply the utterance of fact, takes no heed of the extent but only of the kind of service, and puts on the same level of recompense all who, with however widely varying powers, were one in spirit, in diligence, and devotion. The eulogium on the servants is not ‘successful’ or ‘brilliant,’ but ‘faithful,’ and both alike get it.
The words of the lord fall into three parts. First comes his generous and hearty praise,-the brief and emphatic monosyllable ‘Well,’ and the characterisation of the servants as ‘good and faithful.’ Praise from Christ’s lips is praise indeed; and here He pours it out in no grudging or scanty measure, but with warmth and evident delight. His heart glows with pleasure, and His commendation is musical with the utterance of His own joy in His servants. He ‘rejoices over them with singing’; and more gladly than a fond mother speaks honeyed words of approval to her darling, of whose goodness she is proud, does He praise these two. When we are tempted to disparage our slender powers as compared with those of His more conspicuous servants, and to suppose that all which we do is nought, let us think of this merciful and loving estimate of our poor service. For such words from such lips, life itself were wisely flung away; but such words from such lips will be spoken in recognition of many a piece of service less high and heroic than a martyr’s. ‘Good and faithful’ refers not to the more general notion of goodness, but to the special excellence of a servant, and the latter word seems to define the former. Fidelity is the grace which He praises,-manifested in the recognition that the capital was a loan, given to be traded with for Him, and to be brought back increased to Him. He is faithful who ever keeps in view, and acts on, the conditions on which, and the purposes for which, he has received his spiritual wealth; and ‘he who is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much.’
The second part of the lord’s words is the appointment to higher office, as the reward of faithfulness. Here on earth, the tools come, in the long run, to the hands that can use them, and the best reward of faithfulness in a narrower sphere is to be lifted to a wider. Promotion means more to do; and if the world were rightly organised, the road to advancement would be diligence; and the higher a man climbed, the wider would be the horizon of his labour. It is so in Christ’s kingdom, and should be so in His visible Church. It will be so in heaven. Clearly this saying implies the active theory of the future life, and the continuance in some ministry of love, unknown to us, of the energies which were trained in the small transactions of earth. ‘If five talents are “a few things,” how great the “many things” will be!’ In the parable of the pounds, the servant is made a ruler; here being ‘set over’ seems rather still to point to the place of a steward or servant. The sphere is enlarged, but the office is unaltered. The manager who conducted a small trade rightly will be advanced to the superintendence of a larger business.
‘We doubt not that for one so true
There must be other, nobler work to do,’
The last words of the lord pass beyond our poor attempts at commenting. No eye can look undazzled at the sun. When Christ was near the Cross, He left His disciples a strange bequest at such a moment,-His joy; and that is their brightest portion here, even though it be shaded with many sorrows. The enthroned Christ welcomes all who have known ‘the fellowship of His sufferings’ into the fulness of His heavenly joy, unshaded, unbroken, unspeakable; and they pass into it as into an encompassing atmosphere, or some broad land of peace and abundance. Sympathy with His purposes leads to such oneness with Him that His joy is ours, both in its occasions and in its rapture. ‘Thou makest them drink of the river of Thy pleasures,’ and the lord and the servant drink from the same cup.
III. The excuse and punishment of the indolent servant.
The lord’s answer again falls into three parts, corresponding to that to the faithful servants. First comes the stern characterisation of the man. As with the others’ goodness, his badness is defined by the second epithet. It is slothfulness. Is that all? Yes; it does not need active opposition to pull down destruction on one’s head. Simple indolence is enough, the negative sin of not doing or being what we ought. Ungirt loins, unlit lamps, unused talents, sink a man like lead. Doing nothing is enough for ruin.
The remarkable answer to the servant’s charge seems to teach us that timid souls, conscious of slender endowments, and pressed by the heavy sense of responsibility, and shrinking from Christian enterprises, for fear of incurring heavier condemnation, may yet find means of using their little capital. The bankers, who invest the collective contributions of small capitalists to advantage, may, or may not, be intended to be translated into the Church; but, at any rate, the principle of united service is here recommended to those who feel too weak for independent action. Slim houses in a row hold each other up; and, if we cannot strike out a path for ourselves, let us seek strength and safety in numbers.
The fate of the indolent servant has a double horror. It is loss and suffering. The talent is taken from the slack hands and coward heart that would not use it, and given to the man who had shown he could and would. Gifts unemployed for Christ are stripped off a soul yonder. How much will go from many a richly endowed spirit, which here flashed with unconsecrated genius and force! We do not need to wait for eternity to see that true possession, which is use, increases powers, and that disuse, which is equivalent to not possessing, robs of them. The blacksmith’s arm, the scout’s eye, the craftsman’s delicate finger, the student’s intellect, the sensualist’s passions, all illustrate the law on its one side; and the dying out of faculties and tastes, and even of intuitions and conscience, by reason of simple disuse, are melancholy instances of it on the other. But the solemn words of this condemnation seem to point to a far more awful energy in its working in the future, when everything that has not been consecrated by employment for Jesus shall be taken away, and the soul, stripped of its garb, shall ‘be found naked.’ How far that process of divesting may affect faculties, without touching the life, who can tell? Enough to see with awe that a spirit may be cut, as it were, to the quick, and still exist.
But loss is not all the indolent servant’s doom. Once more, like the slow toll of a funeral bell, we hear the dread sentence of ejection to the ‘mirk midnight’ without, where are tears undried and passion unavailing. There is something very awful in the monotonous repetition of that sentence so often in these last discourses of Christ’s. The most loving lips that ever spoke, in love, shaped this form of words, so heart-touching in its wailing, but decisive, proclamation of blackness, homelessness, and sorrow, and cannot but toll them over and over again into our ears, in sad knowledge of our forgetfulness and unbelief,-if perchance we may listen and be warned, and, having heard the sound thereof, may never know the reality of that death in life which is the sure end of the indolent who were blind to His gifts, and therefore would not listen to His requirements.
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 25:26-28
26″But his master answered and said to him, ‘You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed. 27Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. 28Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.'”
Mat 25:27 “interest” This term was an idiom taken from child bearing. OT guidelines for interest are found in Deu 23:19-20. A Jew could only collect usury from Gentiles.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
wicked. Greek. poneros. App-128.
thou knewest. Greek. oida. App-132.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
26, 27.] Luke prefixes ,-viz. because, knowing the relation between us, that of absolute power on my part over thee,-if thou hadst really thought me such an hard master, …, in order to avoid utter ruin. But this was not thy real thought-thou wert . .
The , &c. is not concessive, but hypothetical;-God is not really such a Master.
.] in Luke (Luk 19:23) .
is interpreted (see ch. Mat 21:12) by Hesychius. There was a saying very current among the early Fathers, , which some of them seem to attribute to the Lord, some to one of the Apostles. It is supposed by some to be taken from this place, and it is just possible it may have been: but it more likely was traditional, or from some apocryphal gospel. Suicer, Thes., under the word, discusses the question, and inclines to think that it was a way of expressing the general moral of the two parables in Matt. and Luke.
But, in the interpretation, who are these ? The explanation (Olsh., and adopted by Trench, Parables, p. 247) of their being those stronger characters who may lead the more timid to the useful employment of gifts which they have not energy to use, is objectionable, (1) as not answering to the character addressed-he was not timid, but false and slothful;-and (2) nor to the facts of the case: for it is impossible to employ the grace given to one through anothers means, without working ones self.
I rather take it to mean, If thou hadst really been afraid, &c., slothful as thou art, thou mightest at least, without trouble to thyself, have provided that I should have not been defrauded of the interest of my money-but now thou art both slothful and wicked, in having done me this injustice. Observe there would have been no praise due to the servant-but would not have lost its . The machinery of religious and charitable societies in our day is very much in the place of the . Let the subscribers to them take heed that they be not in the degraded case of this servant, even if his excuse had been genuine.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Thou: Mat 18:32, Job 15:5, Job 15:6
Reciprocal: Gen 3:17 – Because Pro 6:6 – thou Pro 10:26 – so Pro 18:9 – that is slothful Pro 21:25 – General Mat 24:48 – if Luk 19:22 – Thou knewest Rom 12:11 – slothful Tit 3:11 – being Heb 6:12 – ye 2Pe 1:8 – barren
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
5:26
This servant was both wicked and slothful; wicked in making false accusations against his lord, and slothful in being indolent to do something with the money. Thou knewest, etc., does not mean that his lord admitted the accusations, but used them as a basis for the condemnation in the following verse.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 25:26. Wicked because slothful. Neglect is also wickedness.
Knewest thou. A question. Granting that this were the case; comp. Luk 19:22 : Out of thine own mouth will I condemn thee.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Mat 25:26-27. Thou wicked and slothful servant Wicked, because slothful. Observe well, reader, slothful servants are wicked servants, and will be reckoned with as such by their Master: for he that is slothful in his work, and neglects to do the good that God has commanded, is brother to him that is a great waster, by doing the evil that God has for bidden, Pro 18:9. He that is careless in Gods work, is near akin to him that is busy in the devils work: Satis est mali nihil fecisse boni. It is evil enough to have done no good. Omissions of duty are commissions of sin, and must come into judgment as such. Slothfulness makes way for wickedness, and when the house is empty, the unclean spirit takes possession of it. Thou knewest I reap where I sowed not? That I require impossibilities! This is not an allowing, but a strong denial of the charge. Thou oughtest therefore, &c. On that very account, on thy own supposition, to have improved my talent, as far as was possible. To have put my money to the exchangers, &c. He mentions this instance of good management, because it was the lowest that could be, and was attended with the least trouble; to intimate that, though the servant had not pursued that particular sort of trade in which he ought to have employed the talent, yet if he had been at any pains at all to improve it, though it had been little, his lord would have accepted it. And then I should have received mine own with usury , with interest, or produce. Anciently, the import of the word usury was no other than profit, whether great or small, allowed to the lender for the use of borrowed money. As this practice often gave rise to great extortion, the very name at length became odious. When Christian commonwealths judged it necessary to regulate this matter by law, they gave to such profit as does not exceed the legal, the softer name of interest; since which time, usury has come to signify solely extravagant profit disallowed by law; and which, therefore, it is criminal in the borrower to give, and in the lender to take. As it is not this kind of profit that is here meant, the word usury is now become improper. Campbell. Observe, reader, though the parable represents but one in three unfaithful; yet, in a history that answers the parable, we find the disproportion quite the other way; when ten lepers were cleansed, nine of the ten hid the talent, and only one returned to give thanks, Luk 17:18-19. The unfaithful servant was he that had only one talent, but doubtless there are many that have five talents, and bury them all; great abilities, great advantages, and yet do no good with them: but Christ would intimate to us, 1st, that if he that had but one talent was reckoned with thus for burying that one, much more will they be accounted offenders that have more, that have many, and bury them. If he that was but of small capacity was cast into outer darkness, because he did not improve what he had as he might have done, shall those be spared that trample under foot the greatest advantages? 2d, That often those who have least to do for God, do least of what they have to do. 3d, That the hard thoughts which sinners have of God will be so far from justifying their slothfulness, that they will rather aggravate and add to their guilt; so that in the day of final accounts, they will be left quite without excuse; all frivolous pleas will be overruled, and every mouth will be stopped.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Rather than commending this slave, his master gave him a scathing condemnation. Instead of being good and faithful he was wicked and lazy. To be lazy is to be unfaithful. The master used the slave’s own words to condemn him (Mat 25:24-25). If the master really was hard and grasping, the slave should have known he was in for trouble if he proved unfaithful. At least he should have put his master’s money into the hands of moneylenders. That would have been a fairly safe and easy way to manage it, and it would have earned some interest. The Jews were not to charge fellow Jews interest on loans, but they could charge Gentiles interest (Deu 23:19-20).
". . . risk is at the heart of discipleship (Mat 10:39; Mat 16:25-26); by playing safe the cautious slave has achieved nothing, and it is his timidity and lack of enterprise . . . which is condemned. Schweizer, 473, pertinently describes his attitude as representing ’a religion concerned only with not doing anything wrong.’" [Note: France, The Gospel . . ., p. 956. He quoted the English translation of E. Schweizer, The Good News according to Matthew.]