The Parable of the Unjust Steward
The Most Difficult of the Parables of Jesus?
The parables of Jesus are unique teaching tools that appear in the synoptic gospels of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, and Luke. These stories, which utilize familiar imagery and experiences from everyday life in 30AD, allowed Jesus to convey complex spiritual truths in an understandable way. One such parable, known as The Parable of the Unjust Steward, is considered the most difficult parable to understand. Let's analyze this parable in detail.
Understanding Parables in General
Jesus often employed parables to veil His teachings. When His disciples asked Him why He spoke to the crowd in parables, Jesus responded,
Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Matthew 13:10-11
We find something similar in the Book of Mark:
And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
Mark 4:11
Jesus' Parables serve a dual purpose: revealing spiritual truth (in the context of earthly examples) to those who are willing to hear, and concealing it from those who are not.
In a general context, this concept of people seeing or interpreting the same thing differently can be referred to as subjective perception or perceptual divergence. This refers to the idea that our individual experiences, beliefs, cognitive biases, and emotions can influence how we perceive or interpret the world around us. In a biblical or theological context, this concept is related to spiritual discernment or divine revelation. Spiritual discernment refers to the ability to understand or perceive things that are hidden or obscure from a spiritual or divine perspective. Divine revelation, on the other hand, refers to God unveiling or disclosing something that was previously unknown or unperceived.
Biblical examples of perceptual divergence:
Exodus 14:19-20:
The Israelites are fleeing Egypt, pursued by Pharaoh's army, and God is leading them as a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. When the Egyptians approach, the pillar, representing God's presence, moves from leading the Israelites to being a barrier between them and the Egyptians. In these verses, the cloud brings darkness to the Egyptians, yet gives light to the Israelites. They are both seeing the same pillar, but experiencing it in different ways, according to God's will. To the Israelites, the pillar is a comforting light in the darkness, but to the Egyptians, it is an ominous cloud obscuring their vision. The physical pillar hasn't changed, but its appearance and function are radically different for the two groups.
Kings 6:15-17:
The prophet Elisha and his servant have a very different perception of the same scene. The servant sees them surrounded by a hostile army and panics. Elisha, however, prays that God will open his servant's eyes, and when He does, the servant sees the mountains filled with horses and chariots of fire. The physical situation hasn't changed, but the servant now sees a divine reality that he didn't before.
Luke 24:13-35:
After the resurrection of Jesus, two disciples are walking to Emmaus and talking about the recent events. Jesus himself joins them on their journey,
But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
Luke 24:16
It's not until they sit down for a meal and Jesus breaks bread that
...their eyes were opened, and they knew him...
(Luke 24:31)
Here, they are seeing the same person in a different way due to God's will.
Acts 9:1-9:
On the road to Damascus, Saul (later Paul) sees a blinding light from heaven and hears Jesus' voice, but those traveling with him do not see the light in the same way. They hear the sound but do not see anyone.
The Gospel of John, which does not contain parables, is written in a more profound, spiritual, and theological manner, and presents Jesus's teachings in long discourses rather than short parables, seeking to bring the reader into a deeper understanding via revelation of the Holy Spirit.
The Parable of the Unjust Steward
The Parable of the Unjust Steward (or Shrewd Manager) is found in Luke 16:1-13. This parable presents a complex narrative that challenges conventional moral expectations and invites deeper reflection on the use of worldly resources and the nature of true wisdom and foresight.
Text of the Parable
And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And he called him, and said unto him, 'How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.' Then the steward said within himself, 'What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed. I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.' So he called every one of his lord's debtors unto him, and said unto the first, 'How much owest thou unto my lord?' And he said, 'A hundred measures of oil.' And he said unto him, 'Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty.' Then said he to another, 'And how much owest thou?' And he said, 'A hundred measures of wheat.' And he said unto him, 'Take thy bill, and write fourscore.' And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light. And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.
Luke 16:1-13
Analysis
1. Setting and Characters:
The parable involves a rich man and his steward, who is responsible for managing his master's estate. The steward is accused of wasting the master's goods, which puts his position and future security at risk.
2. The Steward's Dilemma:
Faced with the loss of his job and the prospect of a bleak future, the steward devises a plan to secure his well-being. Recognizing his limitations and unwillingness to perform manual labor or beg, he decides to use his current position to gain favor with his master's debtors.
3. The Steward's Plan:
The steward calls in the debtors and reduces their debts. This act would have made the debtors favorably disposed towards him, potentially offering him support or shelter once he is no longer in his position. It's important to note that the steward's actions, while seemingly generous, are driven by self-interest and are executed at his master's expense.
4. The Master's Response:
Surprisingly, the master commends the steward for his shrewdness. This commendation is not for the steward's dishonesty but for his foresight and cleverness in securing his future.
5. Jesus' Commentary:
Jesus uses this story to make a broader point about the use of worldly wealth. He suggests that his followers, the "children of light," could learn from the shrewdness of worldly people in how they manage temporal affairs. The phrase "Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness" suggests using worldly resources to secure eternal rewards, possibly implying that material wealth should be used in a way that benefits others and furthers the kingdom of God.
6. Concluding Exhortation:
The parable concludes with a lesson about faithfulness and stewardship. Jesus emphasizes that one who is faithful in little is also faithful in much, and conversely, one who is dishonest in small matters will be dishonest in greater ones. The parable ends with the statement, "Ye cannot serve God and mammon," highlighting the ultimate choice between serving God or wealth.
Interpretations
The challenge in this parable lies in its apparent approval of dishonest behavior for personal gain. However, the focus is not on the steward's ethics but on his resourcefulness in the face of crisis. The parable encourages believers to use their resources—however worldly or unrighteous they may seem—in a way that prepares for their future, particularly their eternal future. It's a call to spiritual wisdom, urging believers to be as prudent in their spiritual investments as the people of this world are in their temporal ones.
This parable, like many others, uses a complex narrative to convey deeper spiritual truths, inviting readers to reflect on their use of resources, their foresight in spiritual matters, and their ultimate allegiance to God over material wealth.
"Mammon" is a term that originates from the New Testament, where it is used to describe wealth or material possessions, often with a connotation of something that can exert a corrupting influence or be an object of excessive desire. The word itself is derived from Late Latin 'mammona', which was taken from the Greek 'mamōnas', and ultimately traces back to an Aramaic word meaning "wealth" or "riches". In biblical context, mammon is not just money or material wealth; it represents an idolatrous focus or dependence on wealth as a source of security and value, which can lead to avarice and greed.
The most famous reference to mammon in the Bible is in the Sermon on the Mount by Jesus, found in Matthew 6:24 and Luke 16:13.
No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Matthew 6:24
No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Luke 16:13
In this context, Jesus is teaching about the impossibility of being devoted to both God and wealth, highlighting a fundamental choice between spiritual values and material gain. The use of "mammon" in this passage emphasizes the idea that wealth can become a master or god if it is allowed to dominate one's life, priorities, and values, thereby diverting loyalty and devotion from God.
Both Matthew 6:24 and Luke 16:13 present the same teaching of Jesus, emphasizing the impossibility of serving two masters. These passages highlight the incompatibility between serving God and serving wealth (mammon). While the wording is nearly identical in both verses, understanding the slight nuances can enrich our comprehension of Jesus' message.
Similarities:
Content: Both verses convey the same fundamental message—that one cannot serve two masters because doing so leads to conflicting loyalties and actions.
Structure: The structure of the statements is almost identical, suggesting a deliberate emphasis on the teaching.
Application: Both verses apply this teaching to the relationship between serving God and serving mammon, illustrating the broader principle with a specific example.
Differences:
Context:
Matthew 6:24: This verse is part of the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus addresses various aspects of righteous living. The context in Matthew focuses on the themes of storing treasures in heaven versus on earth, trust in God’s provision, and a call to single-minded devotion to God.
Luke 16:13: This verse appears in the context of Jesus' teachings on wealth, specifically following the parable of the unjust steward. Luke’s context emphasizes wise and faithful stewardship of resources and contrasts worldly wisdom with godly wisdom.
Nuances in Language: 'Hate and Love' vs. 'Hold to and Despise':
Hate and Love: These terms represent the strong emotional and volitional reactions one has towards the two masters. If one master is hated, it means that serving that master is detested, while love indicates devotion and preference.
Hold to and Despise: These terms delve deeper into the commitment and disdain one has towards the masters. To "hold to" means to cling, be loyal, or be dedicated to one master, while to "despise" means to look down upon or treat with contempt the other master.
The repetition of "hate and love" alongside "hold to and despise" is not mere redundancy:
Emotional and Volitional Responses: "Hate and love" depict the emotional and volitional stance one takes towards each master.
Commitment and Contempt: "Hold to and despise" illustrate the practical outcomes of those emotional stances—how they manifest in actions and attitudes.
Theological Implications
Exclusive Loyalty: Jesus teaches that exclusive loyalty to God is necessary. The conflicting nature of the two masters means that one's love and devotion to God must be complete and undivided.
Incompatibility of Motives: Serving wealth (mammon) inherently conflicts with serving God because the pursuit of wealth often leads to greed, materialism, and self-reliance, which contradicts the values of God’s kingdom.
Conclusion
Jesus' teaching in both Matthew 6:24 and Luke 16:13 highlights the impossibility of serving two masters due to the inevitable conflict in loyalties and actions. The use of "hate and love" along with "hold to and despise" enriches the understanding by covering both emotional inclinations and practical commitments, emphasizing the necessity for undivided devotion to God. The slight differences in context between Matthew and Luke provide additional insights into how this principle applies to various aspects of discipleship and stewardship.