Thoughts going in, Sunday Sep 19th

1 Jesus told his disciples: "There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions. 2 So he called him in and asked him, 'What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer.' 3 "The manager said to himself, 'What shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I'm not strong enough to dig, and I'm ashamed to beg-- 4 I know what I'll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses.' 5 "So he called in each one of his master's debtors. He asked the first, 'How much do you owe my master?' 6 " 'Nine hundred gallons of olive oil,' he replied. "The manager told him, 'Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred and fifty.' 7 "Then he asked the second, 'And how much do you owe?' " 'A thousand bushels of wheat,' he replied. "He told him, 'Take your bill and make it eight hundred.' 8 "The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. 9 I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings. 10 "Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. 11 So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? 12 And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else's property, who will give you property of your own? 13 "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money."

Commentators like to say that this is perhaps the most difficult parable in the Bible, as Jesus cites an unsavory fellow doing dishonest things, and then draws a positive application for his hearers. However, while this might challenge some of our presuppositions about Jesus, it most certainly fits with his tendency to use everyday/ordinary occurrences for the purpose of teaching about the kingdom of God. With most commentators that I consulted, I would say that the parable itself concludes in vs 8a, with the rest being commentary/application.

First, some notes on the story itself: This is called the Parable of the Unjust Steward, but truth be told, neither Jesus nor Luke say that it’s a parable—hence, technically, this COULD be a real account that Jesus had heard of (maybe it was even common knowledge to his hearers). The rich man in the story is VERY rich, as judged by the amounts owed him in the story. Indeed, more than one commentator observes that the debtors are, themselves, “well off.” A lot of people get hung up on exactly WHAT the unjust steward was doing in order to lose his job in the first place. He was, according to the TNIV “wasting the possessions” of the master. The Greek word is ‘diaskorpizown.’ It’s the same word that’s used in the parable of the Prodigal Son where, in Luke 15:13 it says the son “SQUANDERED his estate in loose living.” Hence, even though stewards such as the man in this story are expected to skim their own living off the business transactions of their masters, it appears that this steward went too far. Indeed, one commentator says that the steward in the story overstepped his bounds and acted as if HE were master.

Verse 4 is a critical verse. Here we are treated to the internal monolog of the guilty steward. He knows his goose is cooked, he knows that he will lose his job. We might say that he “sees the writing on the wall.” What follows is very decisive action on his part. One commentator actually views the stewards action as ‘revenge’ on the master for firing him—but this seems unduly complicated. From a straight reading of the text, it appears rather that the steward is hoping to ingratiate himself enough to other households that—for him—represent future employment opportunities.

Vss 5-7…much ink has been spilled on the sums of discount the steward suggests for each debtor. Some, wanting to make the unjust steward “less unjust” have suggested that the steward discounts the bill only by the amount that would’ve been his own commission. This, to me, seems like wishful reading on the part of the commentator. To me, a more fascinating issue is to compare the original charge against the steward—squandering the master’s goods—with his latter behavior…discounting the debt owed by the master’s debtors. It seems to me that many “masters” by today’s standards would consider THAT, also, to be a “squandering of resources.” Again, some commentators have gone too far by suggesting that the master’s commendation of this activity on the part of the steward illustrates that THIS ‘grace,’ is the activity The Master (God) wanted from the steward all along. Wishful reading. Let’s not forget that the purpose of the parable, as drawn from the “punchline” in vs 8 is the SHREWDNESS (prudence/wisdom) of the steward.

This shrewdness is seen in three ways: (1) the steward’s decisiveness. He wasted no time assessing his position and formulating his plan. (2) the plan itself: ingratiating himself with several moderately rich patrons was a very good idea—especially given the culture of the 1st century where so much was based on ‘tit-for-tat’ type thinking. In a very real way, these debtors were now in HIS DEBT for the huge favor he did for them. (3) the blowback affect. Even though the master intended to fire the steward, it is obvious in the story that he didn’t do this BEFORE the steward discounted these debts. As a consequence, the master is now known far and wide as a man of IMMENSE GENEROSITY, for everyone would naturally assume that the steward was acting under the master’s orders. True, the master is out some payment in the short run, but in the long run the master has achieved a windfall in standing and personal capital. One could even say that the master demonstrates his own shrewdness when he realizes this immediately.

What I love about this story is that it actually translates into the modern era pretty well. I could almost envision a similar story set among the financial elites of Wall Street brokerage houses, etc. And these are, often, the very people that society in general holds as being “extremely shrewd” when it comes to the intricacies of making money under ANY circumstance. In this sense, The Point of the parable is just as easy to see: Jesus is saying, isn’t it interesting that the people of This World have a shrewdness when it comes to seeing the writing on the wall; when it comes to assessing their own peril or finitude…especially regarding money. Why then, are children of The Light (who by very definition are *supposed to be enlightened) so dense? The steward KNEW he was a steward….the stuff he was working with wasn’t his own; The steward SAW that money/stuff was a TOOL intended to be USED, not intended to be its own end; and the steward CALCULATED that time was limited; decisions had to be made now.

Evidently Jesus seemed to think his hearers could apply this thinking to their lives. What do you think?

Cheers,

TM