In order to understand the meaning and the application of the parable of the talents, we must take note of the crucial terms and their meanings. Let me call your attention to the most important elements of the parable, as I now understand it.
The element of time. Time has been a significant factor in our Lord’s teaching concerning His coming and the end of the age, beginning in chapter 24. Jesus made it clear that His return would not be immediate, but after much trouble and the passing of a considerable period of time. While there would be sufficient evidence for His followers to discern the general “season” of His return, neither the day nor the hour would be known (Matthew 24:32-36, 42). Beyond this, His return would come at a time when it was not expected (Matthew 24:44). In the parable of the talent, there are two clear references to time. First, the master stayed away for a long time (Matthew 25:19). Second, the faithful servants immediately went to work to increase their master’s money (Matthew 25:16-17).
The element of money. It is indeed unfortunate that the term “talent” means something very different today from what our Lord meant when He told this parable. The talent was the largest measurement of money in those days. Since a talent was actually a measurement of weight, it did not have a constant value. A talent of gold, for example, would be worth a whole lot more than a talent of bronze. While commentators differ somewhat over the approximate value of a talent in today’s economy, all would agree that it was a large amount of money. Some say that it was the equivalent to 20 years’ wages for a common laborer.275 We must remember, then, that a talent is a measure of money; it is not a reference to abilities. The talents were distributed on the basis of ability, not as the bestowing of ability.
We should be careful to recognize that in this parable the mere possession of a talent is not evidence of salvation. The one-talent slave is clearly not saved; he is condemned to hell. In a similar way, in the parable of the soils (Matthew 13:3-9, 18-23) the mere germination of the seed does not seem to represent salvation. It would appear that only the fourth soil represents the true believer. The second and third soils represent those who initially show some interest in the gospel, but then reject it when the meaning of the gospel becomes clear. The true believer is represented by the seed that grows, that endures, and that bears fruit.
From the parable of the talents we seem to be informed that unbelievers are entrusted with certain things, and that they will also give account for their stewardship. I believe that there are other texts of Scripture which indicate that God has entrusted (by common grace, in some cases) certain assets to all men, and that all men are accountable to God for how they use (or do not use) these resources which God has entrusted to them. I believe that we see this in Romans 9, where Paul speaks of the things God has entrusted Israel:
1 I am telling the truth in Christ (I am not lying!), for my conscience assures me in the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed—cut off from Christ—for the sake of my people, my fellow countrymen, 4 who are Israelites. To them belong the adoption as sons, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the temple worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from them, by human descent, came the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever! Amen (Romans 9:1-5).
Our Lord’s rebuke of the scribes and Pharisees is often couched in “stewardship” terms. God entrusted Israel, and especially its leaders, with the truth, and they did not use it properly.
The element of work. This is the reason I was critical of the translation of verse 16 (see footnote 1 above). The original text is quite clear here – it is the first servant (and we assume the second, as well) who immediately sets to work with his master’s money. It is not the money that goes to work, as such, but the worker. When the third servant’s excuses are set aside, it becomes evident that this man is lazy – he didn’t do any work. He didn’t even hand the money over to bankers,276 to let them go to work with it.
The element of profit. I have often been puzzled over these words, repeated several times in the New Testament:
“For the one who has will be given more, and he will have more than enough. But the one who does not have, even what he has will be taken from him” (Matthew 25:29; see also 13:12; Mark 4:25; Luke 8:18; 19:26).
How is it that the one “who does not have” has something taken from him? How can you take something away from a person who has nothing? I now see the answer, which appears to be consistent with all of the places where this principle is set forth. The one “who does not have” but yet does “have” (because what he has is taken away) is the one who has his master’s money, but has made no profit from it. The third servant has no profit, no gain, to give his master, so his talent is taken away and given to the one who went to work with his master’s money and made great gains for him.
We find this same principle stated in connection with the parable of the soils (Matthew 13:12; Mark 4:25; Luke 8:18). The soil which produces no grain (in other instances, no fruit, or no profit) is bad soil. Only the soil that produces a crop is “good” soil. And so it is that those who over time work with what they are entrusted, in order to make a profit for their master, are rewarded for their faithfulness. Those who are unfaithful lose not only their reward, but their stewardship.