Luke 19 21

Luke 19:21 kjv

For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

Luke 19:21 nkjv

For I feared you, because you are an austere man. You collect what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.'

Luke 19:21 niv

I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.'

Luke 19:21 esv

for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man. You take what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.'

Luke 19:21 nlt

I was afraid because you are a hard man to deal with, taking what isn't yours and harvesting crops you didn't plant.'

Luke 19 verses

Luke 19 21 Meaning

This verse contains the justification offered by an unfaithful servant for his inaction in the Parable of the Minas. He explains his fear of the master, whom he perceives as severe and unjustly demanding, taking profits from ventures he did not invest in or cultivate. The servant's statement reveals a twisted understanding of the master's character, using it as an excuse for his own failure to generate any return.

Luke 19 21 Context

Luke 19:21 is spoken by the third servant in Jesus’ Parable of the Minas (Lk 19:11-27). This parable immediately follows the story of Zacchaeus, highlighting Jesus' mission to seek and save the lost. Jesus tells this parable as he approaches Jerusalem, because the crowd believed the Kingdom of God would appear immediately (Lk 19:11), perhaps expecting a worldly, immediate political reign. The parable aims to correct this misconception by emphasizing a delay (the master's journey) and the necessity for diligent service and faithful stewardship during that time of waiting for His return. The setting for this parable underscores that even with a clear understanding of the master's expectations (or what one perceives them to be), responsibility remains. The unfaithful servant's excuse of a "harsh" master (perhaps reflecting a harsh perception of God's demands or Roman authority) attempts to justify his inactivity and failure to put the given resources to work.

Luke 19 21 Word analysis

• For (γὰρ - gar): A conjunction indicating a reason or explanation for the preceding statement or implied thought. Here, it introduces the servant's justification for his inaction.
• I feared (ἐφοβούμην - ephoboumen): An imperfect indicative verb, denoting an ongoing or habitual state of fear. This is not the reverent, godly fear (φοβέομαι - phobeomai) often encouraged in scripture, but a servile dread, anxiety, or terror that paralyzes action rather than motivates good stewardship. It indicates a subjective feeling, coloring his entire perception and response.
• you (σε - se): The direct object, indicating the target of his fear and the recipient of his accusation.
• because (ὅτι - hoti): A conjunction introducing the cause or reason for his fear.
• you are (εἶ - ei): Present tense, indicative verb, stating a perceived characteristic or enduring quality of the master.
• an austere man (ἄνθρωπος αὐστηρὸς - anthropos austeros):
  • ἄνθρωπος (anthropos): Generic term for "man" or "person."
  • αὐστηρὸς (austeros): This Greek word means harsh, rigid, severe, stern, rough, or unyielding. It implies strictness and difficulty. The servant portrays the master as demanding in a way that he perceives as unfair or unjust, rather than merely rigorous or efficient. This word can describe a master who expects high returns and offers no leniency, reinforcing the servant's anxiety. It’s crucial to note that this is the servant's perception, which is challenged by the master's own words in the subsequent verses.
• you take up (αἴρεις - aireis): Present active indicative, meaning "to lift up," "take away," or "gather." It suggests seizing something, perhaps forcefully or without prior investment.
• that you laid not down (ὃ οὐκ ἔθου - ho ouk etho):
  • ὃ (ho): A relative pronoun, meaning "that" or "which."
  • οὐκ (ouk): Particle of negation, "not."
  • ἔθου (ethou): Aorist middle indicative, meaning "to place," "to put," "to lay down." The servant accuses the master of taking profit from an endeavor where he provided no initial capital or resource. This is an accusation of unjust gain.
• and reap (καὶ θερίζεις - kai therizeis):
  • καὶ (kai): "And," connecting the two accusations.
  • θερίζεις (therizeis): Present active indicative, "to reap," "to gather a harvest." Agricultural imagery implying the gathering of fruits or profits.
• that you did not sow (ὃ οὐκ ἔσπειρας - ho ouk espeiras):
  • ὃ (ho): Relative pronoun, "that" or "which."
  • οὐκ (ouk): "Not."
  • ἔσπειρας (espeiras): Aorist active indicative, "to sow seed." This second accusation uses agricultural terms to reinforce the first: the master is depicted as gaining a harvest without having put in the labor or initial effort of planting. Together, "taking up what you laid not down and reaping what you did not sow" convey a sense of illegitimate, extractive profit without commensurate contribution.

Words-group analysis:

• "For I feared you, because you are an austere man": This phrase sets the tone of the servant's justification. His inaction is attributed to a profound fear stemming from his negative perception of the master's character. This highlights how our understanding or misunderstanding of authority (especially divine authority) can paralyze us. It's a blaming of external factors for internal failures.
• "you take up that you laid not down, and reap that you did not sow": This double accusation underscores the servant's belief that the master's demands are unjust or excessive. He portrays the master as exploiting others' efforts or requiring results without providing sufficient means or initial investment. This language reflects common proverbs about unfair gain or unjust acquisition (e.g., in farming, one must sow to reap). This statement will then be used by the master himself against the servant, showing that even with this understanding, the servant had options for prudent action.

Luke 19 21 Bonus section

• Polemics against Complacency: The parable, and specifically this servant's attitude, directly challenges the notion that passivity or hiding one's talents/gifts is acceptable, especially under the guise of an excuse like fear of God's demanding nature. It refutes a fatalistic view that would absolve individuals of responsibility for their stewardship.
• Misconception of God's Character: While the master's response (Lk 19:22-23) might sound like he confirms being "austere," he's actually using the servant's own words as a rhetorical trap: "If you indeed believed this of me, then you should have done something simple like put the money in the bank." It’s a rebuke of logic, not an endorsement of the servant's perception. The master, as a figure for Christ, ultimately is not unjust; He expects responsible stewardship of what is given, consistent with the investment. This reveals the true nature of God is one of justice and accountability, not capricious harshness.
• Application to Gifts and Stewardship: The mina represents the spiritual or natural gifts, opportunities, and resources God entrusts to His people. This verse serves as a caution against letting fear or a misrepresentation of God prevent us from utilizing these gifts for His glory and the advancement of His kingdom. Many Christians fall into inaction due to fear of failure, inadequate perceived gifting, or a belief that God is overly demanding or difficult to please, leading to unproductive "hiding" of their "mina."

Luke 19 21 Commentary

Luke 19:21 unveils the core misconception of the unfaithful servant in the Parable of the Minas: his paralyzing fear derived from a distorted view of his master. He rationalizes his sloth by portraying the master as "austere"—harsh, unjustly demanding profits without personal investment. This perception, whether accurate to the master's general character or not, becomes the servant's ultimate excuse for inaction. Rather than inspiring diligent service, his fear fostered paralysis and resentment. He saw the master as an extractor, taking what he didn't contribute, thus he felt justified in doing nothing, fearing failure or being exploited. However, the master's response in Lk 19:22-23 pivots the accusation back, implying that even if the servant's perception were true, it should have driven him to minimally wise action, like depositing the money to earn interest. This servant, therefore, is condemned not just for idleness, but for hypocrisy, using a partial truth (or misperception) to avoid responsibility. The parable teaches that our perception of God profoundly influences our obedience; fear that doesn't lead to reverent action often results in spiritual sterility and condemnation.