Tag Archives: Proper 23 Year A

Exodus 32:1-14 – A dream of the future when believers will lose patience and turn to evil ways [Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost]

January 23, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered around Aaron, and said to him, “Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” Aaron said to them, “Take off the gold rings that are on the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” So all the people took off the gold rings from their ears, and brought them to Aaron. He took the gold from them, formed it in a mold, and cast an image of a calf; and they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!” When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation and said, “Tomorrow shall be a festival to the Lord.” They rose early the next day, and offered burnt offerings and brought sacrifices of well-being; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to revel.

The Lord said to Moses, “Go down at once! Your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have acted perversely; they have been quick to turn aside from the way that I commanded them; they have cast for themselves an image of a calf, and have worshiped it and sacrificed to it, and said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt! The Lord said to Moses, “I have seen this people, how stiff-necked they are. Now let me alone, so that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them; and of you I will make a great nation.”

But Moses implored the Lord his God, and said, “O Lord, why does your wrath burn hot against your people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? Why should the Egyptians say, ‘It was with evil intent that he brought them out to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth’? Turn from your fierce wrath; change your mind and do not bring disaster on your people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, your servants, how you swore to them by your own self, saying to them, ‘I will multiply your descendants like the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have promised I will give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it forever.’“ And the Lord changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people.

———————————————————————————————————-

This is the Old Testament selection from the Episcopal Lectionary for Year A, Proper 23, the nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost. It will next be read aloud in church on Sunday, October 15, 2017. This is important as it is about the Israelites building an idol of a golden calf, when Moses was not back on time; and how Moses seems to bargain for the LORD’s patience.

To me, this reading has been a source of slight confusion. First of all, Aaron appears to have fallen in with the wayward Israelites, even helping them with their rebellion. Second, it seems to make God appear surprised at that panic in the camp at the foot of the mountain. However, knowing the truth is always spoken in Scripture and confusion is always a matter of not putting deeper thought into that which confuses, I believe I have something to offer about these aspects of the reading.

In the Exodus 19 we read, “Moses said to the Lord, “The people cannot come up to Mount Sinai, for You warned us, saying, ‘Set bounds about the mountain and consecrate it.’” Then the Lord said to him, “Go down and come up again, you and Aaron with you; but do not let the priests and the people break through to come up to the Lord, or He will break forth upon them.” (Exodus 19:23-24) A.) This means that Aaron was holy, just as Moses was holy; and B.) Moses came down from the mountain of God and presented the Laws to the people, as was the reading from Exodus 20, about the “Ten Commandments,” the selection for Proper 22 Sunday.

Now, in Exodus 32, we have jumped beyond the chapters that tell of the other laws, and the willingness of the people to serve the LORD. They accepted the Covenant. Chapters 25 through 30 deal with building an ark to hold the tablets, the specifics of the tabernacle, and the specifics of the priests who will be allowed in that holy place. Aaron and his sons were designated the first priests of that tabernacle. This means chapter 32 is like one of those Quentin Tarantino time jumps (i.e.: Pulp Fiction), or it is a dream sequence.

When the story of Genesis was telling about Abraham, a similar dream sequence was presented in the second telling of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham’s nephew, Lot, was simply held ransom by the kings of the five cities on the plain in the first telling (where Sodom and Gomorrah were two of those cities), at which point Abraham got some friends together and went and defeated those kings, freeing Lot. Several chapters later, we then read the dream of the fire and brimstone destruction, after Abraham bargained with God about saving those cities … if there were five good people in them. Lot became a weak character in that second telling of Sodom and Gomorrah (along with his whole family), much like Aaron appears to be in this second telling of Moses on the mount.

The reality is that the dream sequences are not to be read as literal history. The dream sequences are to be read as prophecies, with prophecies focused on an omnipresent and continuing future. In dream sequences, metaphor plays a greater role in interpretation. However, a dream sequence cannot ever be used as reason for doubt, as an error reproducing a previous story. Anything that seems to be contradiction is not.

Realizing that prophecy needs to be seen as the value here, we read: “When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered around Aaron, and said to him, “Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.”’ The Hebrew word translated as “delayed” is “ḇō·šêš” (or “buwsh”) which is rooted in the word “bosh.” That word actually states “to be ashamed, or disappointed.”

This means the entire dream sequence is founded on a time when the people shamed Moses, after he came down with the Law. It reflects their disappointment caused by their inability to honor those holy laws, leading them to figuratively seek Aaron. That name means, “Very High” (Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names) or “Bright” (NOBSE Study Bible Name List). This means the people will invariably fail to live up to their commitments to God and seek out a surrogate in their stead (a king to be like other nations, a pope to be God’s link to mankind, or a televangelist who needs money to keep from being called home by God). It is an ongoing disappointment.

In this reading, Aaron became the figurehead spokesman for God, whom the people approached, saying, “Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” The Hebrew word translated as “gods” is the infamous “elohim,” which in Genesis chapter one was written many times, with each routinely translated in the singular (and capitalized) as “God.” By matching the plural number to “us” and the prior use of “the people,” it is easier to see how the Israelites asked Aaron to make them (little-g) “gods,” as those chosen by God to be led out of Egypt.

In the prophecy, this says a future will come when the people will act as gods on earth, due to their religious heritage. Certainly, there are many Christians who see the Jews in this light, and the history of disappointment to uphold their end of the Covenant with God making the Jews a fulfillment of this prophecy. Still, Christians do a good imitation of the miserable records held by “chosen by God” people, with their shameful acts in the name of Christ.

Seeing Aaron, a “Bright,” upstanding holy man (man of the cloth), who has suddenly been elected to a “Very High” position of responsibility, a quick brain hears the people clamoring for him to make them able to claim eternal life in heaven ownership (“gods”). Having gone to his head, he does what all future High Priests, Popes, and Megachurch pastors always do. Aaron said, “Bring me all your gold!”

By specifying “golden earrings” (“gold rings”) the symbolism is the people wanted to be “gods,” but they sought words of approval about material wealth [golden news to their ears]. Therefore, this is a prophecy of the people wanting to see holy men in robes, holding tall staffs, wearing “Very High” hats, who live in palatial estates that are trimmed in gold; and it is a statement of the willingness of the people to contribute to that end.

In regard to this, we read: “[Aaron] took the gold from them, formed it in a mold, and cast an image of a calf; and they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!”’ This is an over simplification of the Hebrew text, as it is not actually stated, “He took from them.”

The literal translation has Aaron “receiving [the gold earrings] from their hands,” which makes the gold an offering, more than a demand. It was motivated by an instruction from the “Very High” holy man, but compliance was never mandatory. It is received in the same way that believers are told they can do the Lord’s work by sending them their pledges and check.

Once the gold was received, it was then “fashioned with a graving tool,” which says the gold was altered with some form of writing etched into the earrings. This was a separate process that took place, prior to the gold being changed into a “molten calf.”

The Hebrew words that are translated as “molten calf” are “‘ê·ḡel mas·sê·ḵāh.” There is evidence that this translation may be misleading and not saying the golden earrings were melted and poured into a mold. Such a transformation would negate all fashioning with an engraving tool, begging the question, “Why do that?” In the reading read in church, this aspect of engraving is omitted in translation.

The word “egel” does mean “calf,” but “maccekah” (theroot word) means “covering.” It makes more sense that Aaron would call for a real, live, “nearly grown male steer” to be brought before him. The golden earrings would have been engraved with the names of the families contributing them, and these would be “made” into a ceremonial “covering” of metal, which would be placed over that “calf.”

I imagine that, especially from a distance, the calf would look golden when covered in a woven spread with many thousands of golden earrings pinned to it. It would look like a young live bull had been molded as molten gold.

Given this possibility, Aaron saying, “These are your gods, O Israel,” is a plural statement that the individual earrings were symbolizing the wealth given to the Israelites as they exited Egypt. This makes revisiting Exodus 12:35-36 worthwhile, which took place after the angel of death passed over the Egyptians and killed every firstborn male.

As their exodus began, we read: “Now the sons of Israel had done according to the word of Moses, for they had requested from the Egyptians articles of silver and articles of gold, and clothing; and the Lord had given the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they let them have their request. Thus they plundered the Egyptians.” (NASB)

This can now be seen as Aaron calling for all those ill-gotten gains, which would be deemed as the cause for why Moses was “delayed.” Worry had set in that God was no longer leading them because of that greed. So, with all those Egyptian earrings pinned to a cloth spread that was placed over a bull of sacrifice, it makes perfect sense to read, “When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it.”

From Genesis 4 and throughout the Old Testament, an altar was “a place of slaughter or sacrifice” (the meaning of the Hebrew word mizbeaḥ, which is written in the text of this reading). Christians today seem to think all the Old Testament altars were some stone barbecue pits, used for outdoor grilling and fun. All the people in the Old Testament who used altars were priests, those who ritually sacrificed fresh slaughtered animals to please God. Ordinary people had campfires and usually ate breads, dairy products and vegetables. Therefore, Aaron had an altar built to sacrifice a living, young bull “calf.”

It is difficult for me to grasp Aaron making an altar to sacrifice an idol made of gold. I am fairly certain this is not commonly taught, so I ask you: “What does you brain tell you about this?”

When Aaron then said to the Israelites, “Tomorrow shall be a festival to the Lord,” the word written that is translated as “Lord” is “Yah·weh.” This means the calf was not a sacrifice to Egyptian gods. It was a cleansing offering to YHWH – “I Am that I Am” – the One God of Israel (and Jesus and Christians).

To then read, “They rose early the next day, and offered burnt offerings and brought sacrifices of well-being; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to revel,” the people celebrated a festival not commanded by God. This too acts to say this reading from Exodus 20 is then a prophecy of such festivals.

Rosh Hashanah (Beginning of the Year) and Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) can be seen as such a Jewish festival of New Year celebration. The Day of Atonement is when a scapegoat is released into the wilderness, carrying away all the sins of the people. In John there is mention of the Festival of the Dedication (aka Festival of Lights – Hanukkah), which was added when the Second Temple was erected. None of these festivals were ordered observed by God. However, this festivity that seems dedicated to God does not stop there.

In America, there is Thanksgiving, which is in some sense a quasi-religious holiday, where Americans (mostly Christians) give thanks for all the fruits of a new world. The festival known as Mardi Gras (Fat Tuesday) and even Halloween (All Hallows Eve) are examples of how Christians like to party, more than care about a religious connection to a holiday (from holy day). These can then be seen as the symbolism of this festival created by a High Priest, Pope, or King (President, Prime Minister) and not God. This story of Aaron and the golden calf festival prophesied that future that has since come.

When the focus of the story then goes to God and Moses on top of the mountain, we have an example of the Abraham story retold, when he bargained with God about how few holy people being present in wicked places would be required for God to spare those places His wrath.

At this point we read, “But Moses implored the Lord his God.” This also is a weak translation of what is written.

The literal translation states, “And sought Moses the face of the LORD his God.” This includes the Hebrew word “paneh,” which was the last word in the First Commandment, the one that all translations leave out. That Commandment fully states, “Thou shall not have the face of another god before [God].” The same words still mean you should not hold any other gods in higher respect than the LORD; but that now includes the face of one’s self.

The presence of that word here says that Moses did not speak as holy Moses, as if he were an equal to the LORD. In the same way, Abraham did not debate with God wearing his face as worthy of divine consideration. Moses then spoke as God speaking through him, because “the face of the LORD” was upon Moses. Undoubtedly, that face had a bright glow.

Keep in mind the symbolism of Moses being with God, on a plane that is high above the ordinary folk. Remember also how Peter, James, and John (of Zebedee) saw Jesus aglow next to Moses and Elijah. The symbolism is Moses was in heaven with the LORD, and the LORD was telling Moses to “Go down at once!” Those stubborn Israelites are at it again!

The same soul in Moses was in Elijah (who went down and ascended without death), and in Jesus (who went down and ascended after death and resurrection). What God told Moses in anger was a prophecy of the terrible ways that his priests were foreseen to act. For God to say, “Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation,” that is a prophecy of Christianity to come. A “great nation” of Moses followers would come through Jesus Christ (the same soul as Moses).

When we then read how Moses told the LORD a thing or two about how it would be wrong to punish the people He just saved, this has to be seen as God speaking through the face of Moses. The defense of mankind’s priests would come through the Judges, David, the Prophets, and Jesus of Nazareth (then Apostles). All would come speaking to the children of Israel who had sinned, telling them to repent or face destruction. Jesus and his followers were like Lot and his small family, in the corruption that was Sodom and Gomorrah, and the corruption that had come over Jerusalem.

Moses speaking as God on the mountain is a prophecy of all the prophets who would come in the name of the LORD. The message is always the same: “Repent or face destruction.” It is (needless to say) a prophecy that is in effect until the End Times.

When this reading ends by stating, “And the Lord changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people,” the LORD did not change His Mind. What was written was “way·yin·nā·ḥem,” which is rooted in “nacham.” That word means, “To be sorry, console oneself, or comfort.” It means God would send messengers of repentance to the people, which was part of His plan all along.

It is God’s pity for mankind that is why he bothers to comfort a bunch of stiff-necked backsliders.

I recall when in a class that was reading Genesis, I commented that God knew Adam and Eve would sin. I said it was part of His plan there also. However, a woman blurted out, “How can you say that!?!?!”

I replied, “Because God is Omniscient.” God knows the story from beginning to end, but we love to put a human face on God, because that makes him more approachable … more like an equal. God is not surprised by anything human do. He’s the Father, which means He has “eyes in the back of His head.”

Thus, the moral of this dream sequence prophecy is that God knows us so-called believers are like children who are told not to take a cookie from the cookie jar, which is then left unattended right in front of the children. To be born in a sinful world means sinners will abound … even those chosen by God to help redeem the ones not chosen.

To see anger in God is really to see anger in believers, when God is not giving believers their way. We love to say, “God turned His back to us,” when the reality is we turn away from God when we sin. The wrath of God is reincarnation, just as the wrath of a first grade teacher is to send little Johnny, who never learned anything, back to the first grade.

This prophecy tells us there will be the Law; but after that presence that will only mean breakage of the Law, requiring repentance.

Same story forever told.

Language, Philippians, Teaching

Philippians 4:1-9 – Some saints might be hot and others cold, depending on the Spirit [Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost]

January 23, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

My brothers and sisters, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm in the Lord in this way, my beloved.

I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord. Yes, and I ask you also, my loyal companion, help these women, for they have struggled beside me in the work of the gospel, together with Clement and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. Let your gentleness be known to everyone. The Lord is near. Do not worry about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you.

——————————————————————————————————–

This is the Epistle selection from the Episcopal Lectionary for Year A, Proper 23, the nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost. It will next be read aloud in church on Sunday, October 15, 2017. It is important because Paul made a call for Apostles to be steadfast in their support of one another, making it a point to mention the role women played in assisting in the spread of the early church.

Chapter 4 of Paul’s letter to the Christians of Philippi is the end of that epistle of encouragement. By beginning his closing statements with, “My brothers and sisters, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm in the Lord in this way, my beloved,” he was stating their closeness in Spiritual relationship. They were all, sender and receivers, “firm in the Lord” as true Christians, filled with a deep love of God, gifted the Christ Mind, via the Holy Spirit of God. This statement of closing says the love of God produces a love within, which is so strong it generates a desire for others to seek their own inner strength of love. They are brothers and sisters as born from the same love that comes from the Father.

When Paul named three people of the church in Philippi, to whom the whole of the epistle was written, those three (a number that is symbolic of initial completion, as representative of the Trinity) were in need of special attention. To recommend that the two women “be of the same mind in the Lord,” says they were still struggling to let go of their egos fully. That could have then been a statement of those two having opposite agendas for the Lord, thus making it difficult for one to fully support the other. Clement then became the one man that both women loved and respected, so he could mediate the differences between the two women. Therefore, Paul was asking all to leave their egos behind and follow the one mind of Christ, as that represents a strengthening of their faith.

On a symbolic level, the names of those mentioned have meanings. A name (then) was given as a parent’s blessing to a child, as a prayer to the Lord. A name then reflects a parent’s wish upon the life of the child, which the child then knows to live up to. Euodia means “Good Road” or “(Have a) Good Trip.” It can be used to denote “Success!” or “Good Luck!” Syntyche means “Great Fortune” (Good or Bad Fortune), but can also mean “Accident” or “Happy Event.” Clement means “Calm or Peaceful or Tranquil.”

Given these name meaning, for Paul to write: “They have struggled beside me in the work of the gospel, together with Clement and the rest of my co-workers,” the intent is less to say those people were actually with Paul in his travels; but the purpose was to show how they were remembered by the meanings of their names, as Paul struggled in his evangelism. Paul needed to find the “good road” to travel, so he had “a nice trip” spreading the Gospel. He was having the “good fortune” of encountering people of all walks in life (some good and some bad), with each meeting yielding the “happy event” of another soul led to Christ. Those people met Paul seemingly by “accident.” Still, through his travels, Paul longed for those friends in Christ that he had to leave behind. Therefore, he struggled with that heartfelt pain, by remaining “calm” and at “peace” in the Lord. Paul reached out to the other disciples of Christ, with true love and affection … that of brotherhood.

The remainder of this letter touched on the traits characterized by the presence of the Holy Spirit. Those become the measuring sticks that show one’s growth in spiritual love. Those traits are: 1.) “Rejoice in the Lord,” as your heart leads your brain; 2.) “Gentleness,” which means one is considerate of others; 3.) “Do not worry,” because fears only come in the absence of God’s love; 4.) “Prayer and thanksgiving,” which is staying in touch with the Lord’s presence within; 5.) “The peace of the Lord,” which is letting the Christ Mind lead your actions; and 6.) Be a model of Christ Jesus, which means all truth, honor, justice, pleasure, and commendation that comes to you is due to his presence within.

n this closing chapter of Paul’s letter to the Philippians, the message that should be taken today is Love. Paul is doing (naturally) what Jesus said to do: “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.” (John 13:34) Jesus said that to his disciples at the Passover Seder meal (the Last Supper), and should not be read as a general “love everyone” message. This is known by the subsequent verse, which says, “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Therefore, Paul was doing as Jesus would have him do, from his heart and soul.

Paul loved his brothers and sisters, and everyone knows that Paul was a disciple of Jesus Christ because of the love he showed in his travels and follow-up letters. It is a commandment given by God, through His Son, and is therefore not an option. To be Christian is to support all Christians with love and acceptance.

What Christians do not read in the books of the Holy Bible are the letters written back to Paul. Paul might have received letters from Euodia, Syntyche, and Clement while traveling, which he responded to in this letter’s closing statements. The same answer spoke to all three.

The point is a true Christian does not shun other Christians. Love is not a silent emotion. Love throws its arms around its brothers and sisters in Christ; and when physical touch is impossible, love throws its arms around its brothers and sisters in Christ through communications and prayers.

It is not the confessions of the disciples that proves they have obeyed this final commandment of Jesus Christ. Jesus gave that command as he was telling the eleven that one would betray him. Judas Iscariot stood as a symbol of Christians without true faith. As such, many will confess they believe in Christ, but not all will join together in unity and steadfastness, as some will sneak out in betrayal.

The measure of success is then the love one expresses to other Christians – the Acts of the Apostles. And that love is known by God , as He knows the heart quite well.

Love comes from the heart, where the throne of God rests. Are you of one mind, which means God sits upon that throne in you – making you his kingdom? Or, do you keep God from ruling over you, because there are so many other Christians who promote agendas in opposition to yours?

Language, Matthew, Teaching

Matthew 22:1-14 – The parable of the wedding banquet [Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost]

January 22, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

Matthew 22:1-14

Once more Jesus spoke to the people in parables, saying: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son. He sent his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet, but they would not come. Again he sent other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited: Look, I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready; come to the wedding banquet.’ But they made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, while the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them. The king was enraged. He sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Go therefore into the main streets, and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet.’ Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered all whom they found, both good and bad; so the wedding hall was filled with guests.

“But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing a wedding robe, and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding robe?’ And he was speechless. Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ For many are called, but few are chosen.”

———————————————————————————————————-

This is the Gospel reading from the Episcopal Lectionary for Year A, Proper 23, the nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost. This will next be read aloud by a priest in church on Sunday, October 15, 2017. This is the parable of the Wedding Banquet and is important because it speaks of all who are invited to serve the Lord, but treat that invitation with ridicule and scorn.

This parable immediately follows the parable of the tenants, which was the Gospel reading for the prior Sunday. Because it begins a new chapter, one can say a day in Jesus’ “inspection” has passed and a new day has begun. This would be why Matthew began by writing, “Once more Jesus spoke to the people in parables.”

Still, the Greek word “apokritheis” was written and not factored into the translation above. That word states that Jesus “answered” the people, or “took up conversation” with them. The implication is that some question asked or something said that needed clarification. This means Jesus did not simply begin speaking in a parable, as a parable is an answer created to make someone think about its symbolism.

This parable begins with the statement that is the overview. Everything hangs from Jesus beginning by stating, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son.” Thus, the question being answered or the clarification needed is relative to the kingdom of heaven.

The parable could then be addressing the question, “How do we gain the assurance of Heaven?” A similar question was posed to Jesus at a prior time to his return to Jerusalem for the Passover festival. That time a young, wealthy Pharisee asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?” (Matthew 19:16-22) Jesus answered quite clearly then: Law, Give, Follow. Now, it is answered symbolically.

When Jesus said the comparison was “to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son,” the focus given by all Christians today is on “his son.” This (of course) is Jesus. Still, to think that Jesus is telling a parable about about himself is over-simplifying this message.

Over-simplification is part of what I call “Big Brain Syndrome.” We think we know a thing or two today, so we are smarter than those rubes who were standing around Jesus then. We slap Jesus on the back and say, “Tell them Jesus, we know you’re talking about you as his son.” However, the sad reality is most people do not have a clue about the real meaning of this parable; but because people today know how to operate a smart phone, they think that makes them become Jesus-like.

Sure, the “king” is God and “his son” is Jesus; but the operative word that needs to be grasped here is “wedding.”

When we read, “[The king] sent his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet, but they would not come,” “his slaves” are those who serve the LORD. Those who would not come are those who think they are better than slaves and equal to a king.

In the symbolism of this parable, the “slaves” are the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob [aka Israel], who served God and attended to His needs. There are quite a few over a long period of time: The Israelites were freed by Moses, who was one of “his slaves”; All the Judges (like Gideon, Deborah, Samson, Eli, et al) were the king’s slaves; all the leaders of the people (like Joshua, Samuel, David, et al) were the slaves of God; and all the temple prophets (like Elijah, Elisha, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, et al) were “his slaves.” That is the meaning of those who were sent out “to call” the invited.

The “invited” are all the children of Israel, which includes Jews (who were then surrounding Jesus) and Christians (now, who are reading about this parable).

What flies over everyone’s head is how the invitation was not to have a bunch of party-goers come to the king’s palace for free food, with plenty of wine available for getting drunk. The invitation has to be seen symbolically as quite important, meaning the invitation was to marry his son. Better yet, it was to marry God and become his son, which would make that person be reborn as Jesus Christ.

Either way, the books of the Holy Bible (then called the Torah and the scrolls) are the record of “slaves” inviting those following the trail of the One God, who all believed they were promised land AND Heaven. The problem was the invitations (then, as an allusion to those standing within earshot of Jesus) only went to Jewish men of position and power.

That is why those who were invited got angry and upset, so that “they made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, while the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them.” Keep in mind this was a parable told well before “women’s lib,” so all the invited were adult Jewish males – menfolk who owned property and wares (things). Now, it applies to anyone (both sexes, Judeo-Christian) who own stuff and control people.

Even in these modern times, when human beings love to call 0 and 1 equal [we’re all numbers], and when the concept of marriage has been rolled in the mud for so long it is barely recognizable and hardly desirable, those who still hold marriage in high regard do so by standards that are considered “old fashioned.”

By this, I mean the man asks a woman to marry him. The man give something of value to the woman (an engagement ring, usually). The woman takes the man’s name in marriage.

To some, perhaps, marriage pleasantly leads to dreams of the husband going off to work and earning a living. He buys the wife a house. The wife then stays home, to cook, clean, and raise babies (the intent of a honeymoon).

Admittedly, fewer and fewer people grow up with this ideal in mind, especially now that some primary schools and kindergartens are teaching gender identity is what you want to be, not what you are. Go figure.

No wonder marriage is seeming more and more like dinosaur bones and relics (“Mortal can these dried bones live?”)

Because of this innate social concept of marriage and submission being a matter of the heart and not one of brawn, females have long been much more inclined to look forward to marriage, as well as believe in religion, God, prayer, and all the things “church ladies” do. Nuns are such devoted believers they marry Christ. Faith, therefore, is a matter of the heart.

Men [gruff, gruff], on the other hand, tend to stay away from all this faith stuff, as much as possible. They usually pray only when they are about to lose money gambling on sports teams. Most men will go along with the pretense of faith, “as long as it keeps the wife happy.” Men also like children … God’s blessings … but still men like the sex part about making babies too (an outward sign of inward grace?).

Women are from Venus, men are from Mars?

Because of that male-dominated-world mentality, when a man is invited to marry the “son” of “the king,” … well forget that! Men have property to purchase and wares to sell, because they have families to provide for … thank you very much for understanding that!

How ’bout dem Bears?

Well, the application of this parable is “one size fits all.” Men and women – equally – are invited to marry God and become Jesus Christ, by receipt of God’s Holy Spirit. Accepting the invitation means gladly saying, “I do!” That does not mean, “I comply.” It means, “I love you God.”

When Jesus said the king announced, “I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready; come to the wedding banquet,” this is the ceremonial sacrifices for all those planned marriages. The “oxen” and “fat calves” are those egos that overestimate their virility and net worth. They are egos fattened by the blessings of God, so those who took the engagement rings of wealth are His beasts of burden … His chosen ones. Once those animals are sacrificed, “everything is ready” to join with the Christ Mind and become “his son” (for the umpteenth time … regardless of one’s human gender).

When we read, “they made light of it and went away, … (and) seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them,” this is how every Jew of Jesus’ Jerusalem and every Christian today, any who will admit “I am no Saint,” they reject this plan of God. God’s plan is for lost human beings to be found, through the light of Christ. But, lost human beings have so much fun being lost, they think self is more important than holy selflessness.

They hear all those slaves of the king giving the same invitations in the holy texts (differently), but they only laugh at it as nonsense, or they mistreat it by writing it off as being a long time ago – no longer applicable in this complex world. Some even kill those writers through the scientific methods of agnosticism and atheism (where they attempt to kill the spirit of anyone reading an invitation and thinking, “Hmmmm. Maybe I’ll go.”)

This kind of response to God’s wedding invitation did not go over well with God. We read, “The king was enraged. He sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city.” Can you recall how the divided kingdoms, Israel and Judah, were overrun and destroyed? Scattered people who had their Promised Land repossessed by God, for failure to accept His invitation to be married to God as “his son.”

This same fate applied to the Second Temple businessmen, and it applies to the exponentially growing number of “Christian” churches that are preaching (through the absence of a “How to be a Saint” message), “Don’t be married to God.” Those are seen as murderers of wide-scale Apostlehood, as the bad shepherds holding flocks of sheep in centers designed for wool profiteering.

When we then read, “He said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Go therefore into the main streets, and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet,” those unworthy were the Pharisees (and other Temple-related well-to-dos). That then factors to modern times as Christians who make a living selling Christianity on TV or in mega-churches [including the Vatican].

This makes “the main streets” be the mainstream of humanity that flows in torrents around the world. The invitation is for anyone who picks up a Holy Bible and reads a slave pronouncing an invitation to be married to God and become “his son” (regardless of human gender). If that person says, “Yes! I want that!”, then, “You’re engaged to marry God!”

To then read, “[The slaves] found, both good and bad; so the wedding hall was filled with guests,” the “good and bad” actually states “the wicked, evil, malicious, slothful” (“ponērous”) and “the intrinsically good, good in nature, good whether or not it can be seen, and believers” (“agathous”). That means there are those found by the “slaves” who were like those who Jesus said were closer to salvation (tax collectors and prostitutes) than the Pharisees (Popes, televangelists, authors of bestselling Christian novels, et al). The “bad” were those sinners who wanted to not be bad, and the “good” were those who fought hard to find support and encouragement to keep up the good fight.

None of those were led to marry God by anyone other than the king’s slaves.

When we read “guests” filled the banquet hall, this is misleading, as weddings are typically many more guests than marriage participants. The Greek word written is “anakeimenōn,” which means “recliners” or those “seated” at the dinner table. Because we are told, “[the king] noticed a man there who was not wearing a wedding robe,” the implication is all those “seated” were properly dressed for their marriage. Now, here was this guy who strolled in wearing his street clothes, or perhaps he was looking like a wolf, uncovered?

When Jesus said the king (God) asked this man, politely, “Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding robe?” the implication is the man had proclaimed to be a “friend” of God and “his son.” However, to be wedded to God, to become “his son” through marriage, to be ceremoniously sacrificed of ego means to be more than simply a “friend.” The Greek word here is “Hetaire,” which means, “a companion (normally an impostor), posing to be a comrade but in reality only has his own interests in mind.”

This is actually a statement of what a true Church consists of. Paul wrote, “There is one body, but it has many parts. But all its many parts make up one body. It is the same with Christ.” (1 Corinthians 12:12) The same can be said of this wedding banquet, where many types of people had submitted themselves to God, to be married through His Christ. All would become “one body” through marriage, as all would become one with God and Christ.

Anyone who is not a true Saint or Apostle, not having talents of the Holy Spirit, is just a “pal,” who “has his or her own interests in mind.” When one’s own interest is a “Big Brain” and not the Christ Mind, then that person is spotted by God the king and questioned. God does not call those “Friend.” He calls them “Impostor!” and asks, “What are you doing with my chosen people?”

Jesus said the response to that questioning by God was, “And [the uninvited guest] was speechless.” That impostor, who didn’t even dress like he was going to get married to “his son,” had nothing to say. When saying the truth, “Just here for the food and wine,” would have been a good start to a conversation; the reality is he was “speechless” for a symbolic reason.

Here, “speechless” means the man’s tongue had not been lit “like a violent rush of wind,” which gave him “a tongue of fire.” His being speechless meant he was unable to answer, because he could not begin speaking in holy language, as would be given from the Spirit within. This is confirmed when one sees how the Greek word translated as “speechless” is “ephimōthē,” which implies “muzzled” or “put to silence.” Thus, only those who were rightfully present at the wedding banquet could speak, but they could only speak what the Holy Spirit allowed.

The moral of this parable is then stated by Jesus as being, “The king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Clearly, the easy summary says, “Ignore the invitations found in the Holy Bible and go to Hell.” However, it is not that simple.

To be bound “hand and foot” is less about the acts of the Lord’s “servants” or “attendants” (those rightfully present at the wedding banquet), but that which binds is self-inflicted. The man was bound by his own actions. He was bound by the path he had taken and those whom he had walked upon to get there (“feet”). Additionally, he was bound by what he had taken from others and kept for himself, instead of giving freely (“hands”).

It was those self-binding actions that cast himself “into the outer darkness,” away from the light of Christ. In darkness souls suffer, because they are reborn time and time again into fleshy bodies that feel the pains of a sinful world. In the world of flesh “there will [always] be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Lamentations will always be for the pains of that which was lost; and, the gnashing of teeth comes from eternally biting on the backs of others, causing a karmic debt that makes one’s own back always be bitten.

The “outer darkness” is the opposite of an inner light. To be cast there is to deny the Mind of Christ. The outer darkness is all the answers a Big Brain becomes speechless to know. The inner light comes from a heart in love with God.

This moral then makes it easier to read the last verse, which states: “For many are called, but few are chosen.” It can lead to confusion, since the man who ended up being cast out can seem to have answered a call. Why, then, wasn’t he chosen? Doesn’t God love everyone?

The man has to be understood as being there under false pretenses. It is like someone going to a church because he thinks he will be more promotable at work that way. The man was not there to be committed to God and Christ on a permanent (24/7/365.25) basis. He was called, but he rejected the true call.

When we read “few are chosen,” certainly God only allows those who love Him deeply from their hearts to marry Him and become One with the Trinity – be a Saint. But, the deeper meaning is (sadly) how few will choose to sacrifice their egos and submit totally to God’s Will. All are called to do that, because the “slaves” took the invitations to those who were not born of a special race and/or religion. No one goes to the kingdom of God simply by birth, with no special requirements of any kind.

One has to earn that. And, when they say you can’t take it with you, it means more than material things. No Big Brains allowed either. The young, rich ruler who Jesus told how to be assured of eternal reward was to get rid of that brain that thinks having more than others makes that point. Then, when Jesus said, “Follow me,” that meant accept God’s invitation to be married, so he would be the next Jesus … Christ … God’s Son.

If only the males of the world could see themselves as called to a wedding banquet to be the bride of God … to become “his son” through marriage … then the world would have a chance of being a better place. However, the world makes men surround themselves with that defender mentality; and, it is hard for both sexes to sacrifice ego and trust in the LORD.

We all know there is only one Son of God, who is Jesus Christ, who sits at the right hand of God. Marriage to God brings about the rebirth of Jesus Christ in the one wearing the wedding gown, reclining before God in subservience. This is quintessentially the meaning of being Christian. Listen to what the “slaves” are saying.

Language, Matthew, Teaching

Matthew 22:1-14 – The Wedding Banquet

January 11, 2026 R. T. Tippett Leave a comment

——————–

This Gospel reading will be delivered publicly by an Episcopal priest on the Sunday of the Ordinary season after Pentecost that is known as Proper 23. This will next take place on October 11, 2020, the day in the lectionary deemed the nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost. It was last read aloud on October 15, 2017, which was also the nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost.

This reading comes from the string of parables Jesus taught while in Jerusalem prior to the official beginning of his final Passover attendance in the flesh. Following Jesus’ return from beyond the Jordan, when he raised Lazarus from death, he spent four days making his presence be known, preaching on the Temple steps. This served as his time of inspection as the sacrificial lamb of God, when he would be found to be blemish free. Matthew 21 told of his first day in this inspection process. This reading is then an account of the beginning of the second day of Jesus’ inspection in the pubic arena.

It is worthwhile to take note that Luke presents a similar parable, told at a prior time when Jesus used the analogy of a great banquet. In Luke 14 we read how Jesus went to eat dinner with some Pharisees on a Sabbath, at which point he noticed how the lawyers tried to gain favorable seating at the table. This led Jesus to privately tell a parable that also told of invited guests refusing to accept an invitation to be freely fed by a man of great wealth. That scenario is now made public, as Jesus is answering a question about the “kingdom of heaven” on the steps of Herod’s Temple.

When it is realized this is a parable about what the kingdom of heaven is like, it become important to grasp how nothing is stated by Jesus that says this place can be compared to some ethereal realm, such as Sheol.

Instead, just as Jesus told a parable that was relative to the Pharisees scrambling to find a place of honor at a table inside a high-ranking Temple leader’s house, this parable about the kingdom of heaven is relative to the world we all live in. It is a worldly comparison, which is both metaphor and symbolic of known reality. That means the kingdom of heaven does exist in the worldly realm, just as Jesus existed there, while also existing beyond the realm of comprehension a human brain can fathom.

When the word “kingdom” is realized to be the place where a king rules, the realm of heaven is where God (YHWH) rules. This means the “king” in this parable is God the Father. When Jesus said his story was about “a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son,” it is easy to see how that metaphor is speaking of God as the king and Jesus as the son. However, this is not the way to read the intent.

First of all, when Christians identify Jesus as the Son of God, the truth of that identification is Jesus became a vehicle of flesh within whom God spoke. By realizing that, God was telling the parable through His Son Jesus. This simple factor makes Jesus become synonymous in the parable Jesus told to a slave or servant, as one who went to invite others to a “wedding feast” (Greek “gamous“).

Second, and most important to realize, when Jesus is realized as the messenger in this parable, that says that when he spoke (as God) to the people, saying the wedding feast was “for his son” (“tō huiō autou ” – “to son of him”) the metaphor is not about a marriage planned for Jesus (the servant) but to those others wo receive the message. The invitation for a ‘wedding feast” (or “banquet”) is not to come as a guest, but the invitation is to become married to the king and become his son. The invitation is a proposal from God to become the “son of him.”

Certainly, in the times of Jesus, men were the only ones of significance. Women and the feminine pronouns were exempted from Jesus’ words, giving the impression that the message was only for males of importance. Christians today love to think that having a penis was seen in olden times as a God-given right to rule the world (at least for men to lord over women). Today, ordination of female priests, as an aftermath of “Women’s Liberation” and “Equal Rights” and as some mighty statement of power to all people, everyone loves to play the exact role as God painted through the words of Jesus (recalled by Matthew). Nobody wants to hear an invitation to become the “son of [the king]” because all those hearing the invitation are so filled with self-importance that nobody (male or female) wants to submit to being the wife of God – and we all know that being a wife means being completely submissive to the Will of God, at all times.

[Here it is important to realize the tradition, as to who is responsible for throwing a wedding feast, says the father of the bride foots that bill. Part of that designation is based on the tradition that having a female child is an ongoing expense, until someone takes that responsibility away through marriage. Thus, a wedding reception is a celebration that a financial liability [a daughter] has been given away! Seeing this makes it easier to accept the invitation to become a son of the king was metaphor for being a wife.]

The term “tō huiō autou ” – “to son of him” must be grasped as an offer to become the offspring of God. Because God is spiritual, God is the creator of all souls. God is masculine [He is not a goddess], thus all souls are masculine as all that is spiritual is masculine. All that is flesh is feminine, simply because feminine is the opposite of masculine. The feminine flesh comes with different body parts that accommodate procreation [called males and females], so human beings like to think they are both masculine and feminine. The proposal by God, sent via His messenger Jesus, says: “Your soul-flesh needs to marry God in order to become holy. If you become holy, then you become subservient to God’s Holy Spirit, as the wife of God. That, in turn, makes God your Father and you [regardless of human gender] His Son.”

Now, the metaphor in the parable told on the Temple steps spoke loudly of the Jews, who were God’s chosen people. More than delivered to the normal Jews [many of them pilgrims in town for the upcoming Passover], God directed this parable though Jesus to those leaders of the Temple (Pharisees, Sadducees, high priests and the Sanhedrin), saying “they made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, while the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them.” Not only had those leaders plotted to have Jesus killed (roughly one week later), but they would later persecute the apostles of Jesus (“his slaves” of God reborn as Jesus in the Christ) the same way. Still, that is the historic bend of this parable, which denies the present historic and all times since Christianity became an exact reflection of the degradation of a religion claiming to be chosen by God.

Christians today make light of the concept of marrying God and becoming His Son Jesus reborn. Just as the Jews [the remnant leftovers of a fallen Israelite nation] were only special in the sense that God had sent His servant(s) Moses (and Aaron) to invite the children of Israel to begin a learning process that would lead them to complete servitude to Yahweh, all marrying His Holy Spirit and becoming His sons [regardless of them possessing penises or vaginas], they never could fully sacrifice their self-egos and become lowly servants of God. Likewise, worship of Jesus as an external god [an idol] keeps Jesus on the car dashboard or in a box at the church, so one is free to sin and then kneel before an icon and pray for forgiveness. Christianity has then become an exact reflection of ancient Judaism, because so few over time had bothered to actually marry God and become Jesus reborn. It is much easier to pretend righteousness than actually walk that rocky road.

Today, none of the big names of Christianity [called all kinds of prestigious titles] would accept an invitation to give up all the celebrity that comes from being a leader of multitudes, only to serve God as a lowly messenger [sans golden crucifixes and bejeweled crosiers]. It would mean giving up the best seats at the buffet and all the benefits of being known as a cable media contributor, when times come to defend religion. That is why God spoke through Jesus about one going to a “farm” [the Greek “agron” means “field,” thus an area of interest] and another to a “business” [the Greek word “emporian” means “trade” or “trafficking”]. Today, this should be seen as the invited choosing instead to go to their mega-churches or their major denomination headquarters [be it what it may be], rather than marry God.

Christians seize those who ask questions about seeming inconsistencies in Scripture or what the true meaning is about when Scripture has been twisted so it fits one group’s special political agenda. Those who speak the truth that comes out from within them, making them minimally become temporary sons of God [regardless of human gender], they become mistreated as outcasts. While the laws of the land no longer allow for public lynching’s, burnings at a stake, or stoning those deemed sacrilegious to death, the messenger is regularly killed if the messenger does not toe the line as to commonly held beliefs. Those beliefs are where misguided ideologies have been constructed, themselves taught and worshipped as gods. Jesus said a prophet is not a prophet in his home town; so, if they will try to kill Jesus, they will certainly try to kill anyone who threatens a safe (and profitable) way of existence.

When God then spoke through His Son Jesus, saying, “The king was enraged. He sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city,” this should strike fear in everyone who cannot place their (his or her) hand on a Holy Bible and swear to God, “I have sacrificed my self-ego so my body of flesh can serve the Lord totally as a lowly servant that does nothing but seek others who will receive the Holy Spirit and become likewise Jesus Christ reborn. I understand that is the truth of being Christian. So help me God or strike me dead for lying.”

Plenty would stand up and publicly state those words, knowing no lightning bolts will ever come from the sky and kill anyone who says them. They would have too much to lose by giving up their lifestyles as leaders who profit from religion, knowing the masses will give and keep giving more to follow someone who says he or she is God’s servant, so he or she never has to do anything other than give a few bucks to be saved. What they do not realize as they would have broken a commandment (using the Lord’s name in vain) and death will surely come to them, as they stand in a body of flesh that breathes air, because their soul will be promised nowhere to go once physical death does overcome that body of flesh [a certainty]. Thus, the king sending troops to destroy murderers and burn cites [remember Sodom and Gomorrah?] is then metaphor for removing all chances of eternal life from those who anger God by rejecting His invitation to marry His Holy Spirit and become His Son reborn.

The troops are not angels flying down from heaven, swinging flaming swords. They are all dressed like soldiers in the Red Chinese Army. They are so-called Russians with CCCP t-shirts under their fatigues. They are any and all Muslim militia ready, willing and able to sacrifice their lives for Allah, just to think that the great Satan in the West can be struck down dead. The King does not create those who are willing to commit evil deeds in the world. The troops of evil are created by the lack of God’s sons on earth.

Marriage to God is the only way for a soul to avoid an end that will always find it returning into the world as a body of flesh that has no true life. Jesus is the model that all true Christians must become, in order to release their souls from that path to death. Refusing to accept a proposal of marriage to the King means signing one’s own death sentence. An “incarnation” means “the embodiment of a soul in some earthly form,” so “reincarnation” says a soul failed to marry God and be released from that repetition. Refusing the proposal says one said, “I believe,” when that was a lie, bringing about one’s own condemnation – always a weak soul controlled by the evils of the flesh.

God then told the crowd that had asked what the kingdom of heaven is like what God the King did next. He ordered his slaves, saying “The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Go therefore into the main streets, and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet.” Then we read that “Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered all whom they found, both good and bad; so the wedding hall was filled with guests.” Clearly, this is the advent of true Christianity. The Jews no longer were the special people they thought they were, as simple Jews and Gentiles were invited by the servant apostles to come marry their God. Those accepting the proposal became true Christians.

As true as that was, the truth is also that the rapid spread of true Christianity became stunted by Constantine beginning to use the separation made from the fallen Temple of Jerusalem and the influx of pagans into gatherings called churches [ekklesia] to create an organization that would be little more than a reproduction of that Temple system destroyed. This becomes a model of the collapse of Israel and Judah [two nations split from one], falsely resurrected as Jerusalem in Judea. Early Christianity also split into Eastern and Western ideologies that organized hierarchies that ruled over the people, rather than lead the people to individual marriage with God. Thus, the “good and the bad” reflects a mix of true Christians (apostles-saints) with pretend Christians [themselves degreed in beliefs], all at the same celebration of marriage for different reasons; that becomes a comparison to Jesus later talking of the sheep and the goats.

It is here that the companion reading from Luke becomes helpful in understanding the collection of “both good and bad.” After those invited to come to the great banquet came up with one measly excuse after another for not attending, the master of the house instructed his servants to “Go out quickly into the streets and alleys of the town and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame.” The metaphor of “poor, crippled, blind, and lame” says the replacement invitees were those deemed to be sinners because of their physical maladies. As for the Jews being the invitees, that meant the servants were told to go find the lesser Jews and bring them in the house to be fed. The same sense of oneness should be applied to the Christians brought to the wedding banquet (or feast), such that “both good and bad” is a poor translation that needs to be closely examined, in order to grasp what God actually told his slaves to find.

The Greek text states the servants of the king brought all they could find, who were “ponērous te kai agathous” or “evil both kai good in nature.” The Greek includes the word “kai,” which is a word that makes a statement of importance that should be recognized in that to follow where “kai” is placed. By realizing that and by knowing these words are separated by comma marks, making them work collectively as one segment of words, the translation actually states, “pain-ridden also kai good in nature.”

When read as one segment of words, the “bad” comes first, but then importantly (“kai“) those have been transformed into “good.” The word “te” has been translated as “both” (a good translation possibility), but it translates better as “and.” Because “kai” translates as “and,” “te” is transformed into “both,” simply to avoid saying “and and.” Because all words are part of one segment, the meaning is the ones called are “both – pain-ridden turned into good.” Therefore, no one present in the wedding banquet is “evil” or “bad,” although all had prior been “wicked” as sinners, who were pained by those addictions to sin before their marriage to God.

Improper translations need to be addressed at this point, as twice the NRSV & NIV ignore an important element (in particular when realizing the Jewish audience Jesus was speaking to), which is translated as “guests.” In both cases, forms of the root Greek word “anakeimai” are written (“anakeimenōn” and “anakeimenous“), which translates as “I recline, especially at a dinner-table.” (Strong’s usage) Certainly, any hired help would not be permitted to recline at a wedding party, implying that any so relaxed would be guests; but the element of reclining at a table to eat and drink offers implications that must be grasped.

In the Passover Seder ritual, the Jews recline while eating that specific dinner. It is customary for a child to ask his (or her) father, “Why do we always sit to eat, but tonight we recline?” The father then teaches all in attendance that reclining while eating is something only the rich do. This says the Israelite race is meant to be poor servants to Yahweh, with the exception allowed being when they honor their commitment to observe the Passover. It is then symbolically stated through the ritual that it is the sacrifice of themselves to serve only God that makes them rich spiritually. Thus, at a dinner offering bitter herbs and charred bones of flesh, they are allowed to recline while dining.

The Passover was when the Israelites committed to their God, through the sacrifice of a blemish free yearling lamb, whose flesh was eaten and whose blood was spread over the doorposts of their homes. It was the presence of that blood that spared them from the physical death of the firstborn males that came when the Lord passed over Egypt that night. This must be read into this parable told by God through His Son, as it says all who had been wicked but then were good in nature had made themselves sacrificial lambs, so their souls had married God making each of them the son of the king.

By understanding that everyone is wholly good, through that marriage to God the King, it then makes sense when God said through Jesus, “When the king came in to see the one’s reclining, he noticed a man there who was not wearing a wedding robe.” That translation leads a non-Jew to think, “Well, I guess the Jews back then all dressed in wedding robes and gowns, as some Jewish ritual us Christians don’t have to observe.” That is wrong to think, as the only ones who dress up fancy in a wedding is the bride and bridesmaids. That makes knowing what was actually written important.

The Greek text written states, “eiden ekei anthrōpon ouk endedymenon endyma gamou“. That literally translates to say, “he saw there a man not being dressed in clothes of marriage”. The last word, “gamou,” can either translate as “marriage” or “wedding,” as it is the root word written throughout this parable, even meaning “wedding feast.” That makes the word “endyma” (“clothes”) combine to mean the “apparel of marriage” or the “wedding garment.” This says that “the king” [i.e.: God, who has an all-seeing eye] looked out over everyone present in this metaphorical gathering [for what the “kingdom of heaven is like”] and “saw one of the human race [which can include males and females as “anthrōpon“] not wearing a wedding gown.”

Back when gowns were not so expensive they had to be rented for a day and returned.

Of course, most Christians have seen the movie Wedding Crashers and they know people looking for free food and alcohol at a wedding reception (especially one paid for by wealthy parents of the bride) do not show up dressed like street urchins. Everyone shows up wearing nice clothes, but none of those clothes hang in their closets afterwards, never to be worn to anything again, other than weddings. The only “clothes of wedding” are those worn by the ones being married, most particularly the wedding gown of the bride. Knowing that, God the King saw someone crashing His wedding reception whom He had not married.

God then spoke to the wedding crasher. He called him “Friend,” through the capitalized Greek word “Hetaire.” While this importantly (capitalization) makes it seem God is not angry with the wedding crasher, the word should be read accordingly: “hetaíros – properly, a companion (normally an imposter), posing to be a comrade but in reality only has his own interests in mind.” (HELPS Word-studies) God then called this human being out for what he (or she) truly was: a pretender; one who rejected the proposal of marriage, but then expected to enter God’s kingdom because of a life of pretense.

Knowing this, the capitalization becomes the importance of God the King knowing the heart of the impostor trying to sneak into the kingdom of heaven. The importance is a statement about the goats Jesus told his disciples would be separated from the sheep when the “son of man” comes in his glory. The sheep go to the right hand of the king, while the goats go to the left hand. Both sheep and goats feed in the same fields, but only the sheep are married to God, as “sons of man.” The sheep are true friends, who help God without their egos allowing them to realize that fact. Conversely, the goats do nothing to help God and they are too egotistical to realize that failure. Therefore, the one who is called out in this wedding gathering is a goat and clearly a false friend.

When God asked this human how he came without being dressed as a bride to be married, the impostor was “speechless.” This act of “silence” becomes proof that there was no love of God that drew in this soul to the wedding party. All who are married to God, as rebirths of the Son, speak only what the Father tells them. If the impostor was indeed married to God, he would have spoken the truth. The truth was then spoken through an inability to speak for the Father.

This failure to be a devoted bride of God became clear when God the King had his servants take this impostor and “Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” In that translation is another example of translators reversing the order of what is written. The Greek text states: “Dēsantes autou podas kai cheiras“, where we find another “kai” indicating importance.

The capitalized first word shows the importance of being “Bound,” by present actions in the past [Greek aorist active participle]. It was the inability to speak the Word of God that cause the human himself (or herself) to find its own actions “having Bound” itself to a state of being that was not a wife to God. This meant the soul could not walk the path of righteousness – which was symbolized by the wedding dresses all the others had put on. They had all walked down the aisle of righteousness, clothed in those robes that state commitment through self-sacrifice. Thus, as Jesus had told his disciples only those who could raise the cross of responsibility and walk the path set by him could follow, this one wedding crasher was a failure in that regard. That soul in a body of flesh was like Judas Iscariot and unable to walk, due to his own binding of his feet.

Following the use of “kai,” the importance is then placed on “hands” (Greek “cheiras“). The importance must be read as another self-inflicted binding, where this soul would not sacrifice self-ego in order to serve God fully. Thus, he (or she) bound its own hands, keeping them from being the hands of a servant. According to HELPS Word-studies: “xeír – properly, hand; (figuratively) the instrument a person uses to accomplish their purpose (intention, plan).” The importance says tied hands prevent one from truly becoming a Christian.

When the judgment of the impostor is found to be “throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” this should be realized as two phases. In the Greek text a semicolon is placed, rather than a comma mark. That punctuation mark makes it clearer to see the two are separate stages of punishment. First, “the outer darkness” (or “skotos to exōteron” – “darkness about external”) is the opposite of the inner light of life that comes from God, through the Son: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” (John 8:12) God did not throw this soul there, as that soul cast itself into darkness [an absence of light] by not being willing to sacrifice self and serve only God.

Following the semicolon is a series of words that are separated by the word “kai.” The first half of this segment places focus on the “weeping” or “lamentations.” This becomes representative of the physical realm, where the plagues of the flesh cause pains and tears to flow. The Greek word “klauthmos” (“weeping”) becomes a statement that says, “bitter grief that springs from feeling utterly hopeless.” (HELPS Word-studies) The “wails” are from those who expect God to come to their aid, only to find their “cries” going unheeded, because of their own self-egos.

Still, following the word marking importance to follow (“kai“), the “gnashing of teeth” symbolizes the true emotional feeling held for God, when He does not reward the goats of the Christian world, because they reap what they have sown. The importance of this gnashing of teeth is similar to the “speechless” state the soul found. The eyes of tears and the grinding of teeth are all physical elements surrounding a reincarnated soul, one which cannot be released from a soul’s refusal to serve only God.

Finally, God spoke through Jesus summing all this up by saying, “Many are called, but few are chosen.” The “Many” (a capitalized “Polloi“) includes both Jews and Gentiles, so the whole world that seeks the truth of Yahweh will hear a call to attention. The importance of capitalization says there is no human being that cannot find God offering their soul to marry Him and become His Son and letting Him become the Father. This is the importance of the servants (apostles in the name of Jesus Christ) carrying invitations to more than just the Jews and then to the Gentiles. Still, the “Many” are those who are seeking God in their lives.

The reality of “few are chosen” is it means “few indeed choose,” where it is up to the individual to self-sacrifice and say, “Yes” to God’s proposal. When that devotion leads one to commit to God, then God will choose that soul to be His forever.

Summary

The first words of Matthew 22 are: “Kai apokritheis“. This says this parable is most important to realize. The importance it presents is such that what Jesus would then say presents an “answering,” God “responding,” and a conversation “replying” to the questions seekers have about what the kingdom of heaven is. It is a question that not only existed that day, because it is still one needing “answering” today.

The kingdom of heaven is then a marriage between one’s soul and God. This is the merger of a soul with the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the prototype of this state of being, such that it is his soul that becomes reborn into all who marry God. Marriage to God means the death of the self-ego, to be replaced by the Christ Mind. Thus, the invitation so easily refused asks, “Will you submit your ego to God and become His wife?” – an invitation those stubborn and stiff-necked people refuse to accept.

The moral of this story is the choice is always left to the individual. God will not force humanity to walk a road of righteousness; but then the world is the only place sin is permitted to exist. Choosing to not sacrifice self and be willing die of ego, to be resurrected as Jesus Christ, is what most people choose to do. Only those whose hearts feel the presence of God is near will open those hearts to be penetrated by God’s Holy Spirit. That is how all spiritual wives receive their husbands.

Explaining the Readings

Tag Archives: Proper 23 Year A

Exodus 32:1-14 – A dream of the future when believers will lose patience and turn to evil ways [Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost]

Matthew 22:1-14 – The parable of the wedding banquet [Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost]

Matthew 22:1-14 – The Wedding Banquet

The Episcopal Lectionary Discerned