For good or for bad, religious leaders, the Jewish authorities of the first century AD and modern Christian leaders today, have great influence over the common folk. To be sure, some, but not all, of the people are able to see through the hypocrisy of wicked leadership. Nevertheless, such insight often produces religious critics rather than spokespersons for righteousness. During his public ministry, Jesus was often at odds with the religious leaders of his day, and he didn’t shy away from exposing their hypocrisy for what it was. Mark 11 describes Jesus’ three entries into Jerusalem amide hosannas and accolades to his being the son of David. Of course, his casting out the businessmen from the Temple compound angered the Temple authorities. However, after confronting him, they found themselves unable to keep him from doing the things he did. Jesus also used a parable to expose them as fraudulent servants of the Lord.
After the tables were turned upon them (Mark 11:27-28; cp. 11:29-30), the ‘teachers’ of the Law became Jesus’ pupils, and they listened, as he taught the Parable of the Wicked Tenants (Mark 12:1; cp. Isaiah 5:1-7), which they correctly perceived concerned them (Matthew 21:45). With some very minor differences, the general consensus of the scholars is that in the parable the certain man represents the Father. Matthew describes him as a householder, which points to the Father being the head of the family, meaning the whole world in general. The vineyard symbolizes Israel, which he planted when he brought them into the Promised Land, and the husbandmen are the Jewish authorities, whom he left in charge of his vineyard. The fence in the parable would be the Law of Moses, which protected Israel from easily being corrupted, as the gentiles were. The tower is the Tabernacle or the Temple of God, while the winepress points to the altar in the Temple, where animals were slaughtered and offering was made for sin. The season points to the time, which culminates in the end of the age (cp. Deuteronomy 31:29; Matthew 24:3), and this season or end of the age was time that the prearranged payment should be made to the owner of the vineyard. The servants in the parable, of course, represents the prophets, whom the Lord had sent to his people, but the husbandmen had them either beaten or killed (Mark 12:2-5).
The context of the parable is understood in that the householder (Matthew) or certain man (Mark) went into a far country (Mark 12:1), meaning the Lord’s presence wasn’t felt as it was during the time of Moses. So, through the parable Jesus accused the Jewish authorities of treating the Lord, the householder (Matthew) or certain man (Mark), as an ‘absentee landlord.’ The land laws of Jesus’ day were such that, if the absentee landlord didn’t raise a protest within three years of an ‘alleged transfer’ of his land to its keepers, ownership of the land was from that point onward transferred from the landlord to the servants he placed in charge of the land, when he went away.[1]
Put in this context, one is able to see clearly on what grounds the husbandmen assumed they would own the vineyard once they killed Jesus (the heir in the parable), whose three-year ministry represents the householder’s legal protest against the wicked tenants, who sought to seize his property (Mark 12:6-8).
After Jesus mentioned they killed the heir, he asked what the lord of the vineyard would do to those wicked servants (Mark 12:9). Matthew has the Jewish authorities responding (Matthew 21:41), which Jesus repeats (Matthew 21:43, but Mark records only Jesus’ emphasis of the reply of the Jewish authorities (Mark 12:9), and Luke has the authorities responding in disbelief: “God forbid!” (Luke 20:16).
Therefore, Jesus responded by asking what, then, does Psalm 118 mean? There the one who was rejected by all was surrounded and trapped (Psalm 118:11-12). They slew him, but the Lord helped him (Psalm 118:13-14), showing that his death wouldn’t be the end. He would rise again (Psalm 118:16-18). Therefore, the Stone, which the builders rejected and slew had become the chief cornerstone in the Lord’s master plan (Psalm 118:22; Mark 12:10; Matthew 21:42; Luke 20:17-18), raising him from the dead, and this is marvelous in our eyes (Psalm 118:23; Mark 12:11). Moreover, all of this was prefaced with the people bringing Jesus into Jerusalem with “Hosanna! (i.e., “Save now!”) Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” (Psalm 118:25-26; cp. Mark 11:9; Matthew 21:9),
Convicted and without a legitimate response, the Jewish authorities sought to lay hands on Jesus and have him slain immediately, but they feared the people who received him as a prophet. So, they left him and went their way, still clinging to their desire to somehow have him killed (Mark 12:12; Matthew 21:45-46; Luke 20:19-20).
_____________________________________________________________
[1] See Babylonian Talmud; Baba Bathra 35b, quoted in an early study of mine in Luke: Jesus’ Response and Absentee Landlords.
Smoodock's Blog 
librarygeek
August 28, 2022 at 15:36
This highly metaphorical passage has even more symbols than I realized. Very interesting! So you got all the symbolic meaning of this parable from the Talmud?
I’ve often found the leaders reaction to this parable a bit confusing. They saw the meaning of the symbols and in Matthew state the just punishment of caretakers of the Vineyard even though they know it is spoken against them. I’m surprised they aren’t silent again, hoping the people won’t see the meaning. Then responding to Christ’s judgement that echoes their own, “God forbid, may this never be”, in the Luke version, seems an odd thing to say if you think everyone knows the parable was spoken against yourself. I mean, they state death and losing their place is the just reward of the tenants who try and steal from the rightful owner by killing to the heir, yet then they turn around and say God forbid?! That’s acknowledgment that they are the wicked tenants, isn’t it? Or do they simply mean, God forbid that they would be so sinful and do as the wicked tenants? But I suppose the strangest (but highly human) reaction to this parable warning of their impeding judgement is to not stand convicted and repent, but to want to destroy the One who warns and convicts their conscience.
librarygeek
August 28, 2022 at 16:30
I see now from your referenced previous study that it was just the view of absentee landlords in Israel during the time of Christ that you got from Talmud.
You wrote in your previous study: “So, we see by this law, which was in force during the time of Jesus, the husbandmen treated the lord of the vineyard (i.e. the Jewish authorities treated God) as an absentee landlord from whom they wished to seize legal authority over his possession, and, according to the jurisprudence of the day, they viewed such an act as correct and fair.”
In my mind, I have always viewed the religious leaders who sought to destroy Jesus as a) not truly all that religious as they were more enamored of the power and prestige that they received than of following God and b) convinced themselves that Jesus was NOT sent from God and therefore was worthy of punishment for lying to the people about God. It blows me away to think that they may have known Jesus was from God (regardless of whether they viewed him as the Messiah or merely thought him a prophet) and yet would have purposely sought to destroy him, not caring that God sent him or that there would be consequences for the sin of killing the one sent by God, whom they claimed to represent, just so they could retain their own power. It is amazing to think of anyone actually viewing God as an absentee landlord who has legally forfeited his rights because of his perceived absence of not sending a prophet for 400 years before Christ. I would consider it highly unlikely that they actually judged God an absentee landlord who forfeited his rights if we didn’t see it in our modern culture and even our own human tendency to judge God when bad things happen: How could a just and loving God who still acts in this World allow the evil that happens on this Earth to continue? Humans often feel we have the right to judge God’s actions and inactions.
Elie Wiesel tells us 3 rabbis in Auschwitz even put God on trial and after finding against God, went & prayed to Him. https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/wiesel-yes-we-really-did-put-god-on-trial-1.5056 We don’t understand this feeling that Emmanuel ISN’T with us or that God has even turned his back on us. We’ve all struggled with understanding why God allows evil to happen, or why Jesus could say from the Cross “It is finished!” and yet the evil we see and commit daily makes it seem like we still need a great deal more from Jesus. I suppose knowing the humanness of this feeling of God’s distance, it isn’t surprising if the leaders actually did think God had abandoned Israel and they had a right to ignore His messengers and Heir and take his authority into their own hands. After all… we often think we know better than God – it’s part of our inheritance from Adam.
Eddie
August 29, 2022 at 00:26
Greetings Shari, thank you for you comment, Lord bless you.
No, the absentee landlord comes from commentaries, and the Talmud is quoted in one of them. I merely gave the address.
Concerning the judgment, before they realized it was against them the Jewish authorities replied to Jesus’ question about the parable: What would the Lord of the vineyard do to the wicked servants? They replied, and only afterward perceived Jesus spoke of them.
Eddie
August 29, 2022 at 01:09
Greetings, once again, Shari, and thank you for reading my studies. Lord bless you.
The Sadducees didn’t believe in a resurrection. They viewed their reward was the life they lived. So, there was little impetus to be obedient to God, if in doing so it wasn’t profitable for them. As for the Pharisees, power has a tendency to corrupt. Not everyone bows to the temptation, but many do. Jesus not only upset their manner of life, exposing its hypocrisy, but he also didn’t behave according to expectation, nor did he concede to their interpretation of scripture. He did many miracles that no man could do, that was enough ‘sign’ that he was sent by God, but they refused to believe, unless they could call the shots–do this miracle, as we dictate etc. They wanted signs of their own choosing, like turning stones into bread and casting himself off a cliff to prove he couldn’t die etc. Such signs did not include healing the blind or the lepers etc.
Concerning deliberately going against God, Moses warned Israel to beware of the prophet that does a ‘miracle’ and tries to lead you astray–it is a test from God to see if you would cling to him instead of following a man. It is difficult to admit error. They believed the Messiah couldn’t die. So, they forced the issue: crucify him. If he is the Messiah, no harm would come to him, and we can save Barabbas at the same time. Convincing, if true, but it is a false doctrine (John 12:34). The fact is, Jesus spoke out of the Law and the Prophets, and they knew it. They had no replies for his many questions about the Law. But, they refused to give up their favorite doctrines about the Messiah and the Sabbath etc. They had no defense against his words, so they slew him under the guise that, if they were actually wrong, no harm would come to him. Then they could ‘believe’! But then it would be too late (Matthew 12:38-41), because the Messiah could, indeed, be slain.
Concerning God as an absentee landlord, they didn’t actually view him that way, not consciously. The law was meant for Jews who lived in distant lands and weren’t taking care of their property. That property could be seized by the one left in charge, if the owner didn’t respond in the proper time. Jesus applied that law to how the Jewish authorities treated God and their brethren, and how they viewed Jesus, God’s Son, whom he sent to take charge of what was his.
Concerning modern opinion of God, men are in the state of rebellion against God. The fact that Jesus saved us, doesn’t change that. God’s kingdom is not of this world (as David’s was), it isn’t the world–its commerce, its politics, its military power etc. that Jesus came to save. He came to save **us** from all that, and bring us into his kingdom. Men do evil things and to ask God to judge them for doing evil is the same as asking God to judge me as well for the evil I do. None of us are innocent. When God steps in to judge he judges everyone, not just the MOST guilty–everyone. In Genesis 6 he judged the whole world–men, women and children. When he judged the Jews, he judged the whole nation–men, women and children. No one gets a free pass in judgment. It is true, that we, who are in Christ, are not of this world, so judging the world wouldn’t be the same for us. Nevertheless, we cannot live in this world and not be affected by its judgment. So, who’s the first to call down judgment on ‘whomsoever’? Not me. I would just as soon let God handle evil in his own manner and in his own time. Let God be free to be God, because he has set you and me free to be who we are.