A crucial point in the parable is the absence of a wedding garment. There has been much speculation as to the source of the wedding garment. Some declare it was the custom in Jesus’ day to present wedding guests with garments. However there is little evidence to support such a claim. The parable leaves the source (of the wedding garment) in the background, and simply indicates that a suitable robe was necessary, however obtained. Adding to Scripture what is not given is unwise.
Nevertheless we may speculate, our thought is that it is the “Robe of Christ’ righteousness”, or merit of Christ’ sacrifice, which the Lord imputes to the believer when he takes the second step of a full consecration. This will be better understood when we get to this point in our study on the Tabernacle entitled “The Only Way”.
The verb "had on" in Verse 11 is translated from “enduo” (Strong’s #1746). This verb is used often in the New Testament and has the meaning "to put on." "But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom 13:14); "And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness" (Eph 4:24).
The unrobed guest had accepted the call and entered the banquet hall (typified by those believers who have entered into the “courtyard” of the Tabernacle), but he HAD NOT "put on" a proper garment. Paul gave the meaning of this expression. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Gal 3:27)
Many are called by God and respond by consecrating to righteous living. They receive John’s baptism; but, like the Ephesians and the Hebrews at the time of their enlightenment, they are not "baptized into Christ." They have not yet "put on" Christ. Though many are called, few go on to the second consecration.
All who respond to God’s drawing (John 6:44) are fed spiritual meat and drink (1 Cor 10:3, 4). Just as was Israel at Mt. Sinai, they are enlightened of God’s requirements. The Hebrews were "illuminated" before they were urged to enter God’s "rest."
“But call to remembrance the former days (prior to your having taken the second step), in which, after ye were illuminated, ye endured a great fight of afflictions;" (Heb 10:32).
The Ephesians were first edified by Paul—teaching, which preceded baptism (Acts 19:4, 5).
The Apostle has likewise enlighten us of God’s requirements in Rom 12:1 and of the “acceptable time” in which these requirements are to be made (2 Cor 6:1, 2)
After entering the lighted hall (the “courtyard condition”), after enlightenment (specifically in respects to the “high calling” gleamed from the waters of truth found in the “Laver” accessible to all who have entered the “courtyard condition”), there must be a second response. Those who fail to "put on" the garment, who fail to "put on" Christ, who fail to make the second consecration, are rejected.
Just as the unrobed guest, they are taken from the bright lights of the banquet hall and cast into the darkness outside. They join those called ones who refused to leave their farms, their merchandise. Those who enter the hall and fail to "put on" a garment suffer the same fate as those who made light of the call in the first place.
There is an important nuance apparent in the Greek, which is completely lost in the English translation. “…He [the King] saw there a man which had not [Strong’s #3756] on a wedding garment..." (Verse 11); “… how comes thou in hither not [Strong’s #3361] having a wedding garment?" (Verse 12)
The little word "not" in these verses is translated from different Greek words. In Verse 11 the word used denotes a fact—the guest had not put on a garment.
The word in Verse 12, on the other hand, signifies intention—the guest had willfully not put it on. The King asked in effect, "Is it your willful intention not to have a garment?" The guest knew the garment was required, but was not willing to put it on.
What about you, have you been unwilling to take the "second step" of a full unreserved consecration to the Lord, to put on the wedding garment?
Continued with next post.
