Thus, the last will appear to be first, and the first appear to be last. Jesus’ teachings (parables) about the kingdom must have been received in shock by his listeners, to say the least. And if they did, then the desired effect was achieved. Jesus intended his teachings about the kingdom to challenge his listeners into re-thinking what they knew about the kingdom. The parable that we read in our Gospel passage for today is certainly among those teachings of Jesus that was meant to challenge his audience’s perception of the kingdom. The evangelist Matthew was writing to a predominant but not exclusive Jewish audience. And as was the case with other communities that had come to embrace the new way (of Jesus the Nazorene), growing pains had begun to emerge between members of Jewish background and those who were of Gentile origin. The Gospel of inclusivity and equality that was the bedrock of this new way appears to have upset the members who were of Jewish origin. How could it be that one who had been a believer all his /her life (Christian of Jewish background) be equal to a convertee who, to make matters worse, was not required to observe some of the traditions of the parent faith/religion (cf. Acts 15:22-29)? In this new kingdom inaugurated by Jesus, shouldn’t Christians of Jewish origin – because of them having one foot already in the kingdom - have an “upper hand” compared to the gentiles? Whereas the parable of the laborers in the vineyard can be wrongly interpreted as pointing to the reversal of fortunes in the kingdom, in reality, the parable speaks about the generous, inclusive nature of the kingdom. In human eyes, the equal treatment of the laborers by the landowner at the end of the day was not fair to those hired early in the morning and their complaint was justifiable. For one can argue that the same spirit of generosity that led him to pay the latecomers a full day's wage should have also led him to add some form of gratuity to those who spent the entire day laboring in his vineyard even if they had agreed on the day’s wages. But amidst all these accusations of unfairness to one party, the landowner stood his ground and insisted that he was only being generous with his possessions. The generosity of the landowner should be discerned, not in the way he treated those who worked for only an hour, but in how he treated all his laborers. His act of generosity should be seen in his willingness to let them work in his vineyard, going as far as taking the initiative to go out and look for them. He sought them out because he wanted to share with them his blessings. His second act of generosity was him agreeing with them on what he was going to pay them. He did not want to take advantage of them simply because they needed the job. His third act of generosity was his decision to pay those who had worked for only an hour the same wage as those who worked the entire day, a move that was deemed unjust and unfair by those who worked the entire day. Whatever the grumbling laborers thought of him, he landowner exercised his right of doing as he saw fit with his wealth. And such, Jesus reminds us, is how God handles the affairs of the kingdom. In the kingdom of God, there is no being first or being last. All those who belong to the kingdom are treated as equals by God, for all are sons and daughters of God, brothers and sisters one to another. The values of the kingdom are far removed from the values of the world. For in the kingdom, it is not what us who decide what is good for us but rather God himself.