I don't understand the parable of the Ten Minas.

Great Debates
1

It’s in the New Testament, all of the Jesus books I think.

For some reason, I can’t “get” the point of it.

Here’s a summary:
This really rich guy has been declared a king of a country he apparently doesn’t even live in, so he has to travel there to get crowned king, and then will return home later. Before he leaves, he gives three of his servants 10 minas (which is something like $1k or so) and tells them to do whatever they want with it.

On his way, his subjects (apparently, the ones he will rule over after he is kinged) send a delegation protesting him becoming king because he’s such a famous prick.

He leaves, becomes king, then returns, and summons his servants. The first servant says, “Hey dude, I took the 10 minas and through my television ministry, turned it into 20 minas.” The King is impressed, and gives him 10 cities. The second servant says, “Wassup! I took your minas and invested in stocks, and made 5 more!” “Cool,” says the king, and gives him control of 5 cities.

The third servant comes and says, “Since I knew you were such a prick, and that you always take the fruits of others labor, and you always take credit for other people’s work, I stuck it in the ground and so now I still have the original 10 minas you gave me.”

Now the King was pissed, so he said, “Since you think I’m such a prick, I’m going to show you how right you are by taking away what you have. Even those who have nothing can have something taken away from them. Now bring the subjects who demonstrated against me and have them killed.”

…

Ok, in today’s sermon, the priest started to go on and on about the importance of tithing. For some reason, the parable of the 10 minas is always used by church people (that I’ve heard use it) to encourage the people to tithe more. However, I am confused about what the parable actually means.

Usually, a New Testament parable is a metaphor to teach something about the relationship between God, Men, and/or Sinners. Which is which in this parable?

2

This is also called the parable of the talents (another form of currency).

I always understood it to mean that one should make the most of what he has, to the best of his abilities. The king was angry with guy 3 because he did squat, wasting the opportunity the king gave him.

Here’s the overview from Wikipedia.

3

Well, the Luke story is the parable of the 10 minas. The parable of the talents is somewhat different and is in Matthew. Here’s the complete parable for those who don’t know it:

4

Looking at it, one possible meaning, because, remember, he told the story because “people believed the Kingdom of God was going to appear at once”, is that people shouldn’t wait. Jesus is the master that going on the journey to the far kingdom to be made king. So, while he’s gone, his followers shouldn’t just wait around waiting for the kingdom of God to happen. They have a duty to actually work and carry out Jesus’s message until he comes back.

5

I was confused. Then it just got worse. Just saying.

6

Seems that the point that if a prick is king, you don’t tell him you know he’s a prick because then he’ll really screw you over.

7

I don’t know if that’s really what Jesus was going for there, but it is good advice.

8

Same here. AND it confuses with regards to the “not charging interest” history of Jews vs Christians.

9

My take on it was the oft repeated theme of the New Testament: if you have faith in God (minas = faith), you will be rewarded far more than you gave.

However, it could also be that the story was about having faith in God rather than in man (the King,) regardless of worldly rewards, and thus the servant was the “good guy.”

10

Ummm, Jesus was a Jew. Christianity hadn’t been invented yet.:cool:

11

When I heard that story in Sunday school I thought it was assinine. And that was when I was 9.

Suppose the guy who kept the money safe did so because he didn’t want to LOSE it? The other guys could have lost it all with their stupid gambles, what then? For all the 3rd guy knew, if he lost it, he’d get his head cut off.

What an ass this guy in the story is and what an ass Jesus is for thinking this somehow made sense.

12

Yes, but the history of Christians came after Christianity was invented. I think (Superfluous)'s point was that Jews were historically edged into the moneylender role, because Christians were forbidden from charging interest, but here Jesus is clearly condoning the charging of interest.

Myself, the fellow I always wanted to hear about, but who isn’t in the story, was the one who diligently invested all of the money, but lost it. If these guys were doubling their money so quickly, they must have been making some pretty risky investments.

13

It’s good to be king.

14

Your majesty, you look like the piss boy! :smiley:

15

besides the prick/king/boss/servant angle, it aint getting much clearer.

16

That’s because it ISN’T clearer. That parable is like a Zen koan, according to Wiki, “generally containing aspects that are inaccessible to rational understanding, yet may be accessible to intuition.”

In other words, bullshit. Pretty, and pretty confusing, bullshit, but bullshit none the less. Like the the brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son, the other two servants are screwed out of what was rightfully theirs, and two thousand years of handwaving hasn’t changed that except for the most gullible.

17

The other servants aren’t screwed out of what was rightfully theirs. The king gives ten of his servants a mina a piece, and tells them, “Make money for me”. Two of them make money, and he rewards them. The third doesn’t do anything with the money, so the king chews him out and then takes the money away from him and gives it to the servant who made the most money for him.

18

The man who had to travel to another country to receive his kingdom is probably a reference to Herod Archelaus, who was willed the kingdom of Judea by his father Herod the Great, but, as there were competing claims, had to go to Rome for abritration by the Emperor Augustus. Or possibly to his brother Herod Antipas, who got Galilee out of the same arbitration. Either way, Jesus’ audience would have been familiar with the idea.

19

Right. The whole idea of a nobleman having to go to Rome to confirm his kingship wasn’t an unusual one in the Roman world.

20

I think Jesus was exactly on target in warning his audience against thinking anything was “rightfully theirs” in their relationship with God. Matter of fact, I tend to think that’s the whole point of both parables.