None of the excuses were founded on a real necessity. The man who "must needs go and see" his piece of ground, had already purchased it. His haste to go and see it was due to the fact that his interest was absorbed in his purchase. The oxen, too, had been bought. The proving of them was only to satisfy the interest of the buyer. The third excuse had no more semblance of reason. The fact that the intended guest had married a wife need not have prevented his presence at the feast. His wife also would have been made welcome. But he had his own plans for enjoyment, and these seemed to him more desirable than the feast he had promised to attend. He had learned to find pleasure in other society than that of the host. He did not ask to be excused, made not even a pretense of courtesy in his refusal. The "I cannot" was only a veil for the truth--"I do not care to come."

Der lå ingen tvingende nødvendighed til grund for nogen af undskyldningerne. Manden, som var nødt til at gå ud og se på sin mark, havde allerede købt den. At han havde så travlt med at komme ud for at se på den, skyldtes, at hans tanker var fuldstændig optaget af nyerhvervelsen. Okserne var også allerede købt, og det var kun for at tilfredsstille køberens nysgerrighed, at han måtte ud og prøve dem. Den tredje undskyldning var lige så ubegrundet som de andre. Det, at den indbudte gæst havde giftet sig, behøvede ikke at have hindret ham i at være til stede ved festen. Hustruen ville også være blevet budt velkommen. Men han havde sine egne planer for at skaffe sig glæde og fornøjelser og han syntes, at de var meget bedre end den fest, som han havde lovet at være med til. Han havde lært at finde behag i et andet selskab end værtens. Han bad ikke om undskyldning, han prøvede ikke engang at være høflig. Hans afslag: "Derfor kan jeg ikke komme" skulle kun dække over sandheden: "Jeg bryder mig ikke om at komme."