Matthew 21:31-32

21:31 Which of the two did his father’s will?” They said, “The first.” ¹  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, ²  tax collectors ³  and prostitutes will go ahead of you into the kingdom of God! 21:32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him. But the tax collectors and prostitutes did believe. Although ⁴  you saw this, you did not later change your minds ⁵  and believe him.

Mark 2:14-17

2:14 As he went along, he saw Levi, the son of Alphaeus, sitting at the tax booth. ⁶  “Follow me,” he said to him. And he got up and followed him. 2:15 As Jesus ⁷  was having a meal ⁸  in Levi’s ⁹  home, many tax collectors ¹⁰  and sinners were eating with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 2:16 When the experts in the law ¹¹  and the Pharisees ¹²  saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, they said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” ¹³  2:17 When Jesus heard this he said to them, “Those who are healthy don’t need a physician, but those who are sick do. ¹⁴  I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Luke 5:27-28

The Call of Levi; Eating with Sinners

5:27 After ¹⁵  this, Jesus ¹⁶  went out and saw a tax collector ¹⁷  named Levi ¹⁸  sitting at the tax booth. ¹⁹  “Follow me,” ²⁰  he said to him. 5:28 And he got up and followed him, leaving everything ²¹  behind. ²² 

[21:31]  ¹ tc Verses 29-31 involve a rather complex and difficult textual problem. The variants cluster into three different groups: (1) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. The second son is called the one who does his father’s will. This reading is found in the Western mss (D it). But the reading is so hard as to be nearly impossible. One can only suspect some tampering with the text, extreme carelessness on the part of the scribe, or possibly a recognition of the importance of not shaming one’s parent in public. (Any of these reasons is not improbable with this texttype, and with codex D in particular.) The other two major variants are more difficult to assess. Essentially, the responses make sense (the son who does his father’s will is the one who changes his mind after saying “no”): (2) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. But here, the first son is called the one who does his father’s will (unlike the Western reading). This is the reading found in (א) C L W (Z) 0102 0281 ˹ 33 Ï and several versional witnesses. (3) The first son says “yes” but does not go, and the second son says “no” but later has a change of heart. This is the reading found in B Θ Ë¹³ 700 and several versional witnesses. Both of these latter two readings make good sense and have significantly better textual support than the first reading. The real question, then, is this: Is the first son or the second the obedient one? If one were to argue simply from the parabolic logic, the second son would be seen as the obedient one (hence, the third reading). The first son would represent the Pharisees (or Jews) who claim to obey God, but do not (cf. Matt 23:3). This accords well with the parable of the prodigal son (in which the oldest son represents the unbelieving Jews). Further, the chronological sequence of the second son being obedient fits well with the real scene: Gentiles and tax collectors and prostitutes were not, collectively, God’s chosen people, but they did repent and come to God, while the Jewish leaders claimed to be obedient to God but did nothing. At the same time, the external evidence is weaker for this reading (though stronger than the first reading), not as widespread, and certainly suspect because of how neatly it fits. One suspects scribal manipulation at this point. Thus the second reading looks to be superior to the other two on both external and transcriptional grounds. But what about intrinsic evidence? One can surmise that Jesus didn’t always give predictable responses. In this instance, he may well have painted a picture in which the Pharisees saw themselves as the first son, only to stun them with his application (v. 32).

[21:31]  ² tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”

[21:31]  ³ sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.

[21:32]  ⁴ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:32]  ⁵ sn The word translated change your minds is the same verb used in v. 29 (there translated had a change of heart). Jesus is making an obvious comparison here, in which the religious leaders are viewed as the disobedient son.

[2:14]  ⁶ tn While “tax office” is sometimes given as a translation for τελώνιον (telwnion, so L&N 57.183), this could give the modern reader a false impression of an indoor office with all its associated furnishings.

[2:15]  ⁷ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:15]  ⁸ tn Grk “As he reclined at table.”

[2:15]  ⁹ tn Grk “his.”

[2:15]  ¹⁰ sn The tax collectors would bid to collect taxes for the Roman government and then add a surcharge, which they kept. Since tax collectors worked for Rome, they were viewed as traitors to their own people and were not well liked.

[2:16]  ¹¹ tn Or “the scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 1:22.

[2:16]  ¹² sn Pharisees were members of one of the most important and influential religious and political parties of Judaism in the time of Jesus. There were more Pharisees than Sadducees (according to Josephus, Ant. 17.2.4 [17.42] there were more than 6,000 Pharisees at about this time). Pharisees differed with Sadducees on certain doctrines and patterns of behavior. The Pharisees were strict and zealous adherents to the laws of the OT and to numerous additional traditions such as angels and bodily resurrection.

[2:16]  ¹³ sn The issue here is inappropriate associations. Jews were very careful about personal associations and contact as a matter of ritual cleanliness. Their question borders on an accusation that Jesus is ritually unclean.

[2:17]  ¹⁴ sn Jesus’ point is that he associates with those who are sick because they have the need and will respond to the offer of help. A person who is healthy (or who thinks mistakenly that he is) will not seek treatment.

[5:27]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “And after.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[5:27]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

[5:27]  ¹⁷ sn See the note on tax collectors in 3:12.

[5:27]  ¹⁸ sn It is possible that Levi is a second name for Matthew, because people often used alternative names in 1st century Jewish culture.

[5:27]  ¹⁹ tn While “tax office” is sometimes given as a translation for τελώνιον (telwnion; so L&N 57.183), this could give the modern reader a false impression of an indoor office with all its associated furnishings.

[5:27]  ²⁰ sn Follow me. For similar calls on the part of Jesus see Luke 5:10-11; 9:23, 59; 18:22.

[5:28]  ²¹ sn On the phrase leaving everything see Luke 5:10-11; 14:33.

[5:28]  ²² tn The participial phrase “leaving everything behind” occurs at the beginning of the sentence, but has been transposed to the end in the translation for logical reasons, since it serves to summarize Levi’s actions.