The Parable of the Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-13): a Reexamination…
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE PARABLE OF THE UNJUST STEWARD (LUKE 16:1-13): A REEXAMINATION OF THE TRADITIONAL VIEW IN LIGHT OF RECENT CHALLENGES DAVE L. MATHEWSON Recent alternatives to the traditional interpretation of the parable of the unjust steward are not compelling enough to overturn the traditional view. Jesus has utilized a parable that portrays a steward cheating his master in order to secure his future but uses it to teach a positive, even if shocking, lesson on the prudent use of wealth. Christian disciples should display just as much prudence in their use of possessions, especially in view of the more important crisis that faces them—namely, the coming eschatological kingdom. Such prudence is an effective test of their ability to handle true, heavenly riches. It is also an effective test of their allegiance to God. Christians in this century, perhaps more than any other, need to hear this message anew. PARABLE OF THE SHREWD MANAGER (LUKE 16:1-13): AN ESSAY IN INCULTURATION BIBLICAL HERMENEUTIC Justin S. Ukpong Catholic Institute of West Africa Nigeria Before going on to discuss the background of the parable of the shrewd manager, it is important to bring together the points that have emerged from its textual analysis. These are: ● 1) The parable is a critique of riches and of the rich man, the principal figure of the parable; ● 2) The rich man in the parable stands in continuity with the rich man in the next parable involving Lazarus (16:19-31), and in contrast to the principal figures in the parable of chapter 15, and so he is not representative of God; 3) Four nimshalim are attached to the parable as follows, w . 8b, 9 , 1 0 - 12,13; 4) The ó κύριος of v. 8a refers not to Jesus but to the rich man in the parable; and 5) The ingenuity of the manager is the object of praise in v. 8a. The third explanation takes the background of the text into consideration but also takes the text itself seriously. From the background of the text it is clear that the manager had powers to liquidate debts and give reduction. It is also clear from the text that, at the time he was dismissed, the loans had not matured, for he had to call in the borrowers, not to pay what they owed, but to issue fresh bonds for payment at maturity. The fact that the loans had not matured before he was dismissed means that he was no longer entitled to the interest; it would, when paid, revert to the master. This means that at the time he altered the bonds the amount owed by the debtors (principal plus interest) belonged to the master. Since the manager had power to reduce debts, it seems persuasive to interpret what he did as an exercise of power. It was not therefore a matter of foregoing his fees or a matter of fraud. Nor does the text describe him as falsifying the bonds. He was acting within his legitimate duties. How then does one explain that at v.8a the rich man calls the manager unjust? The rich man calls the manager unjust in the very act of praising him. The manager's acuteness is praiseworthy, but his act of giving debt reductions to these exploited farmers, which he had powers to do, is seen by the rich man as "unjust." This depicts the exploitative economic system's concept of justice, which is giving to everyone their dues. Whatever a person has is their due, and nobody else's. There is no questioning how and where they got it. Thus, all the wealth and all the power which rich people have are due to them, and it should be given to them (no matter the extent of exploitation they engaged in to get rich). And to the poor who have nothing, nothing is their due; they are not entitled to anything, and so they deserve to be given nothing. To do otherwise, that is, to give some of what is due to the rich to the poor, is to be "unjust." In this sense the rich man called his employee "unjust" for reducing the debts of his customers. The concept of justice in the economic system of his time creates a system whereby the poor toil daily to create the wealth which the rich enjoy. Wherever it operates, the rich are kept rich, and the poor, poor. In its holistic sense, salvation involves forgiveness of sin and the continued living in harmonious peaceful fellowship with others (Ps 133:1) as a sign of eschatological reality. Salvation, in this conception, starts on earth but continues unto eternity (Ukpong, 1983:19). It is a reality that is both present and eschatological, material and spiritual. It is essential to the concept of the kingdom that Jesus inaugurated (Ukpong, 1993:150). Such is the salvation that Jesus imparted to Zaccheaus when he said: "Today has salvation come to this house" (Lk 19:9). He had brought his followers into Zacchaeus' house thereby integrating one who was regarded as an outcast into a fellowship and a community. Such integration and fellowship is what the dismissed manager sought with his former customers, when he gave them debt reductions (Lk 16:4). Hence, he is de scribed as having acted wisely (φρονίµως ¿ποίησζν) Moments of life crisis are to be converted into opportunities to take up such challenges. Like the dismissed manager, Christians do not en gage in self- pity nor do they despair or bemoan their fate when faced with a crisis. Rather they take the situation as a challenge to rise to new heights in response to the demands of the values of the kingdom within their community. In sum, therefore, this parable challenges Christians to be committed to work towards the reversal of oppressive structures of contemporary economic systems; and to take life crises as challenges to rise to new heights in response to the demands of the kingdom. The Rich Man and Lazarus 19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ 27 And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father's house— 28 for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29 But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’” .