Answer
In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that faithful stewardship leads to gain and reward, while faithless stewardship results in loss and judgment (Matthew 25:14–30). He explains, “For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them” (Matthew 25:29). The so-called “Matthew effect” is a distorted interpretation of this verse that borrows its wording but changes its meaning. It wrongly applies Jesus’ words to the theory of how social or economic advantages tend to compound—often in the context of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
The term Matthew effect, coined in secular sociology, describes a pattern in which advantaged people tend to gain further benefits over time, while disadvantaged people fall further behind. Though often applied to wealth, the theory also attempts to explain how education, fame, and professional success tend to reinforce themselves. In short, advantages compound, disadvantages deepen, and the gap between them widens.
This view of Matthew 25:29 overlooks the true point Jesus was making, which was not about economic inequality but spiritual accountability. In the parable, a master leaves on a journey and entrusts his money to three servants. The first two servants steward their allotment well and double what the master gave them (Matthew 25:16–17). However, the third servant, motivated by fear, buries the money in the ground and fails to increase it (Matthew 25:18, 24–25). The master praises the first two servants but rebukes the third one (Matthew 25:20–23, 26–30).
The parable of the talents appears within the Olivet Discourse, where Jesus teaches about His return and the final judgment at the end of the age. The rewards He describes point to the blessings believers will receive when He returns. For example, the master says, “You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master” (Matthew 25:21, 23). In contrast, the judgment described in the closing verse is more than a mere loss of responsibility. Jesus warns, “Throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 25:30).
In response to concerns about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, the Bible offers a vision of social and economic dignity that surpasses that of secular society. Scripture rejects the notion that a person’s identity or value is defined by how much he has or lacks. God not only cares for the poor (Psalm 113:7), but He also calls them to meaningful roles in His redemptive plan (e.g., Luke 1:52). Moreover, the Bible often portrays the poor as models of genuine faith. For example, James writes, “Listen, my dear brothers and sisters: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him?” (James 2:5).
To be certain, providing for those in need is an important biblical principle. This is clearly seen in 1 John 3:17: “If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?” (cf. Proverbs 19:17). However, the so-called Matthew effect does not offer a sound or moral solution to this issue. Rather than encouraging generosity, compassion, or personal responsibility, it tends to assign blame to those who have attained wealth, education, or success—without considering whether these gains were pursued in ways consistent with biblical ethics.
In summary, the Matthew effect takes Scripture out of context. Jesus was not talking about redistributing earthly treasures. Whether they are rich or poor, educated or uneducated, professional successful or not, the gospel enables all people to know true wealth, which is knowing Jesus. As Paul writes, “I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ” (Philippians 3:8).