In Matthew 22, Jesus tells a parable that likens the kingdom of heaven to a wedding feast that requires wearing a wedding garment (vv. 1–14). Then a series of questioners come forward: Pharisees ask about paying taxes to Caesar (vv. 15–22), Sadducees question Him about the resurrection (vv. 23–33), and a lawyer asks which commandment is the greatest (vv. 34–40). Though all three questioners call Jesus “Teacher,” in Matthew there is an element of unbelief in this form of address (cf. Matt 12:38). The chapter concludes with Jesus initiating a discussion about the Messiah that silences all His opponents (vv. 41–46).

Interpretation of Matthew 22

1. Verses 1–14, Parable of the Wedding Feast

• The parable describes a wedding celebration hosted by a king for his son.

• As with the previous parable (see Matt 21:33–39), the servants who are sent receive violent treatment, dishonoring the king and his son.

• Wedding celebrations for rulers and other notable people in Israel were expensive, lavish events to which an entire village might be invited and would normally span several days.

• The parable unfolds in two distinct stages: (1) the king deals with the invited guests who refuse to come; (2) he inspects those who do come as to whether they are wearing appropriate attire for the occasion.

• Although invitations for such an event would be sent to everyone well in advance, those invited did not even inform the king of their inability to come until his servants urged them to come.

• The flimsy reasons given for not coming would have been highly offensive because they suggest each had more important business. But what could be more important is difficult to imagine. Of course, the king was also in a position to severely punish those who refused the invitation and treated his messengers so harshly.

• The description of armies coming, destroying the people, and burning up their city (v. 7) is not to be considered as an example of prophecy after the event. In ancient times, the destruction of rebellious cities was nothing unusual. Also, Jerusalem had already been destroyed once by Babylon, and Daniel predicted its destruction again (Dan 9:26; cf. Matt 24:15).

• Rather than let the food go to waste, the king sends out invitations to everyone, including the peasantry who are sure to come for such an experience of a lifetime and who will appreciate the king’s generosity.

• The varied character of the guests (“both bad and good,” v. 10)¹ and the king’s inspection of them represents a judgment scene. Those who accepted the invitation are examined in order to determine who were fit to take part in the festivities.

• Wedding garments were apparently provided, which is the best way to explain why the man is singled out in verse 12. He is apparently wearing ordinary clothing. His speechlessness shows he knew his attire was inappropriate.

• God’s provision of “the garments of salvation” and “the robe of righteousness” is compared to wedding attire (Isa 61:10) and may be alluded to here.

• This parable points to an investigative judgment of those who have accepted the gospel invitation in order to determine whether they have continued to wear this robe of righteousness. Although salvation is free, yet the life of the follower of Jesus must match the profession.

• The parable also indicates this judgment occurs prior to the second advent when the destiny of human beings is still being decided because, when Jesus comes, His reward is with Him, “to give to everyone according to his work” (Rev 22:12).

• Consignment of the man to outer darkness symbolizes his final destruction.²

• The “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt 22:13) describes the terrible condition of those who will be condemned at the final judgment (Matt 8:12; 13:42, 50; 24:51; 25:30; cf. Ps 112:10).

• The word translated “chosen” is used three other times in Matthew, always of those ultimately saved in the kingdom of glory (Matt 24:22, 24, 31).

2. Verses 15–22, Obligations to Caesar and to God

• The successive questioners approaching Jesus signal an escalation in the opposition to His ministry.

• Herodians were supporters of the Herodian dynasty and the Hellenizing influence they represented. The Pharisees, on the other hand, were stringent in their observance of Jewish laws and traditions and longed for independence from Rome. These groups would not normally be allies, but they view Jesus’ growing popularity as a serious threat.

• The flattery with which the interlocutor begins, condemned as it is in Scripture (e.g., Ps. 55:21; Prov 26:28; 29:5), probably alerts Jesus to the unfriendly nature of the question to follow.

• Paying taxes was no more popular anciently than now. “Some estimate that a Jewish family paid approximately 49 percent of its annual income to these various taxes,” including 32 percent to the Romans.³ Besides, for the Jews, paying taxes was not only a tacit admission of Roman authority; with the image of Caesar on the coins it could be considered a form of idolatry (Exod 20:4–6).

• In answering, Jesus immediately calls out the hypocrisy of pretending to believe His message while posing a question to ensnare Him.

• If Caesar is pictured on the coin, it obviously belongs to him and, therefore, should be given back to him. Jesus’ question, in asking about the “image” (Gk. eikōn) on the coin reminds us that we have all been made in the image of God (Gen 1:26–27 LXX, also employs eikon) and, as Christians, that image, marred by sin, is being progressively restored in us (2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10).

• The verbal cognate of the Greek word translated “inscription” (Matt 22:20) is used of God’s law being inscribed on the heart of believers (Prov 7:3 LXX; Heb 8:10; 10:16; cf. Isa 44:5, ESV).

3. Verses 23–33, Question About the Resurrection

• According to Mark, Jesus had taught in the temple for several days by this time. No doubt the Sadducees were eager to reestablish their authority over the temple complex.

• First-century excavations in the upper city of Jerusalem have revealed luxurious houses, complete with sizable courtyards, private immersion pools, and exquisite stoneware vessels that were impervious to ritual impurity. Bridges conveniently connected this part of the city directly to the temple complex. As Jesus indicated, some were enjoying “their reward” already (Matt 6:2, 5, 16).

• The question of the Sadducees is based on the practice of levirate marriage, “whereby the nearest kinsman of a man who dies without sons marries his widow” (Deut 25:5–10).⁴ It seems the case of seven brothers presented to Jesus was from a known family since they are described as being “among” them (v. 25, ESV). Each brother in turn dutifully marries the widow of his recently deceased sibling because none left children.

• Polygamy in Israel was not unusual, especially in patriarchal times, but for a woman to have more than one husband, let alone seven altogether, was inconceivable.

• Jesus zeroes in on the problem, calling the Sadducees “self-deceived,”⁵ giving two reasons: (1) They do not know the Scriptures, having rejected most of them as uninspired and having limited God’s word to what they were willing to believe and practice; (2) they do not know the power of God, having limited it to what their finite minds could conceive as possible.

• The Bible gives us an adequate basis to believe in the resurrection. First, it acknowledges that, after death, the body disintegrates to dust (Gen 3:19). Second, if God knows our physical substance (Ps 139:16) and has given each hair a number (Matt 10:30), surely He is able to resurrect us to immortality. This can be affirmed because the Bible clearly teaches it, even if the process whereby this happens is beyond our present understanding.

• The idea there will be no marriage in heaven has perplexed Christians throughout history. The happily married won’t want a divorce (which God hates, Mal 2:16), and singles are hardly being incentivized to get married to avoid eternal celibacy. Such human reasoning is flawed for the same reason as that of the Sadducees: it rejects the word and power of God. It’s better to acknowledge there are mysteries yet to be revealed, particularly about the life to come, that God gives good gifts to His children (Matt 7:11), and He can do more than we can ask or even imagine (Eph 3:20).

• Since the Sadducees only accepted the books of Moses as authoritative, Jesus answers them on that basis. God identifies Himself as the “I AM” or self-existent One (Exod 3:14), saying in the same context, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (Exod 3:6). Although the patriarchs are all dead and buried, “God is not the God of the dead” (Matt 22:32). As the Creator and source of all life, He does not define Himself in terms of the dead, “but of the living.” Therefore, it can be assumed they will not remain dead but be resurrected to life.

• When the resurrection takes place is immaterial to the point Jesus makes. It is the fact of the resurrection that matters. God “gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did” (Rom 4:17). “He sees the end from the beginning, and beholds the result of His work as though it were now accomplished.”⁶

4. Verses 34–40, the Two Great Commandments

• Unwilling to admit defeat, the Pharisees continue questioning Jesus. One of their number skilled in the law of Moses tests Jesus’ knowledge of the law. Jewish discussions of the Torah identify 613 separate laws, so the question as to which was the greatest would seem to pose a significant challenge.

• Jesus unhesitatingly answers by identifying not one but two commandments, saying everything found in Scripture ultimately depends on them. Loving God is said to be “first”—that is, it must take precedence. However, since the second commandment is “like it,” it is not less important, but only second because it cannot be first. In reality, the two are inseparable: “For he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also” (1 John 4:20–21).

5. Verses 41–46, the Messianic Son of David

• Although none of the questioners could entrap Jesus He succeeds in entrapping them by asking about the Messiah’s lineage. As expected, He is identified as the son of David, presumably a lesser figure since, in Jewish understanding, the father is greater than the son. Also, as forefather of the Messiah and the preeminent king of Israel, David should be greater than one who came later and who would merely restore Israel.

• Jesus quotes Psalm 110, ascribed to David, to prove that the Messiah is in fact greater. We hear a divinely revealed conversation (v. 1) between the Lord (Heb. Yhwh) and the Messiah, whom David calls “my Lord” (Heb. ’adōnay). This distinction of persons is only clear in written Hebrew; in Greek both designations are translated with the same word (kyrios). In Israel, a son might call his father “lord” (as in Matt 21:30), but the father would never so address his son.

• With a master stroke Jesus proves that the Messiah is greater than David and that His place is in heaven at God’s right hand. No one dared question Jesus anymore because His brilliant answers only enhanced His standing with the crowds and diminished the standing of the Jewish leaders.

Application of the Chapter

Some lessons from Matthew 22 include:

1. In the parable of the Wedding Feast the king’s invitation was as wide as imaginable but only a few came. Of those who did come, not all prepared properly for the great event. This echoes warnings of Jesus (e.g., Matt 7:13–14), and the reality of a judgment to come based on our response to the invitation (2 Cor 5:10; Rev 22:12).

2. Sometimes it is argued that taxes are not obligatory, but Jesus is clear that they are and so is Paul (Rom 13:6; cf. Titus 3:1; 1 Pet 2:13).

3. Jesus’ statement to “render . . . to God the things that are God’s,” is a reminder that all our abilities, talents, and resources we have received. As David said, “all things come from You, and of Your own we have given You” (1 Chr 29:14).

4. By returning to God a tithe or ten percent of our financial resources, we acknowledge His ownership of all we have, that we are stewards of what He has entrusted to us. In addition, freewill offerings show our gratitude to God for all He has done for us, including His granting us the “power to get wealth” (Deut 8:18).

5. We should recognize that our own understanding is finite and not limit God’s word to what we are willing to believe and practice, nor reject biblical truths that our minds consider impossible.