He went on to tell the people this parable: "A man planted a vineyard, rented it to some farmers and went away for a long time.  At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants so they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard. But the tenants beat him and sent him away empty-handed.  He sent another servant, but that one also they beat and treated shamefully and sent away empty-handed. He sent still a third, and they wounded him and threw him out. "Then the owner of the vineyard said, 'What shall I do? I will send my son, whom I love; perhaps they will respect him.'  "But when the tenants saw him, they talked the matter over. 'This is the heir,' they said. 'Let's kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.' So they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. "What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will come and kill those tenants and give the vineyard to others." (Luke 20:9-16a)   The point of this parable would not be lost on the religious leaders.  Just prior to this, they had asked Jesus by what authority he did the things that he did, like teaching and cleansing the temple of merchants.  Jesus does not answer them directly, but he does tell them this story.  A man plants a vineyard.  Folks who knew their Bibles, particularly Isaiah, would have recognized that man to be God, and the vineyard to be Israel.  The vineyard owner then sends to get some of the fruit, which would have been the rightful rent payment due him.  He sends three servants, each of them treated worse than the last.  The reference here is likely to Israel's stoning and killing of the prophets: God's servants sent to them time and time again.    The vineyard owner is placed in a dilemma: what to do next.  Our Bible translation doesn't quite catch the full drama of this parable.  The culture of the Middle East in the days of Jesus was a culture of honour and shame.  So it is worth noting that the renters treated the owner's servants shamefully.  Biblical cultural commentator Ken Bailey says this honour culture means that "the abusing of his servants is an insult to his person, and he is expected, indeed honor bound, to deal with the matter."  He had every right, and also the power to contact the authorities and have them send an armed company of trained men to storm and retake the vineyard.  He could choose force, power, and violent judgement to put an immediate end to their abuse.  But instead he chooses a merciful and a costly act of peace.  He chooses to extend the olive branch once more, knowing full well what these violent tenants have done to his servants, and what his risky choice of deeper vulnerability might cost.  "I will send my son," he says, "whom I love.  Perhaps they will" not respect, but "feel shame in his presence."  That's what the Arabic versions say, in faithfulness to the original intent within a culture of honour.  God had been insulted and had had His honor tarnished in the eyes of His people, and yet He chose to put His anger far away and not deal out the judgment they deserved.  Instead, He sent His Son.  A costly act of self-emptying love that has the power to disarm the violence of the tenants, reawaken their sense of shame, and bring peace. That is still the reality today.  So, do we exert our will and control on God's church today, believing in the righteousness of our position?  Or do we still feel ashamed and humbled in the presence of our gentle, self-giving Lord who mercifully comes to us with the offer of peace rather than the sword of judgement?  The invitation, of course, is to continue to accept the offer of peace given us in Jesus, let him heal and take away our shame, and go forward in this same humble, self-giving way of love and mercy that he has offered to us.  

Ver todos los episodios