CHAPTER 16
Jesus told his disciples: “There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions.” Luke 16:1
This is obviously the Lord’s message to his disciples. However, as in the case of many of these private teachings, these were first overheard by others and then by the whole world. In the Old Testament, rich men were usually considered blessed by the Lord. However, with the advent of the kingdom of God, riches began to be considered more of a liability than a blessing (Lk. 6:24; 1 Tim. 6:9; Jas. 5:1-3). Riches take much of our time and effort, since people have to constantly watch over them and guard them. In this case, a trusted manager is found embezzling from his Lord.
Commentators have consistently noted that this is the most difficult parable Jesus ever told.1 Morris says, “The root problem is the commendation of the steward who is so plainly dishonest (v. 8).” 2 Our task is to try and make sense of this parable and to understand the intricacies that are woven into the story.
The rich man was no doubt an absentee landlord, of which there were many in those days. His affairs were administered by a steward (Gk. oikonomon) or house manager. Such a person had a considerable amount of authority. It was important that this key person would be honest and faithful (1 Cor. 4:2). However, this particular steward was a crook, who squandered his master’s assets. Interestingly, the Greek verb meaning “wasted” or “squandered” (diaskorpizō) is the very same word that previously described the Prodigal Son and his squandering of the father’s wealth.3
“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’” (16:2). Finally his dishonesty was discovered by the master, and the manager was called upon to get all the accounts in order. This story reminds us of ourselves as Christ’s servants on this earth. The Bible says, “So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (Rom. 14:12). We will account for lost time, squandered spiritual resources, squandered spiritual gifts, wasted opportunities and even squandered wealth placed in our hands. Obviously, this steward was not a slave but was a free man who was able to enter into agreements for the lord. No slave could do such a thing.4
“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—I know what I’ll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses’” (16:3-4). The manager was probably too old and out of shape to do manual labor such as digging or tilling the earth. Both digging and begging were considered as undignified professions anyway.5 Suddenly, the manager had a burst of revelation and he said something like “I’ve got it!” 6 He had an idea, albeit a crooked idea, for his own self-preservation. He could not dig, he could not beg but he could steal.
“So he called in each one of his master’s debtors. He asked the first, ‘How much do you owe my master?’” (16:5). Summers suggests that this is not just an agricultural situation but a business venture, due to the very large amounts of items listed. Thus, what we may have here is an attempt to cheat the wholesaler.7 This manager had the authority to set amounts and his authority could not be challenged.8
The “crooked” steward’s plan would work like this: By greatly lowering the amounts owed the master, the steward was endearing the various debtors to himself. Pett says, “By giving the large discounts he will win the favor of possible future employers, and at the same time persuade them to pay up, and by clearing the debts, which might possibly never otherwise have been paid.” 9 Coffman makes application here saying, “This lowering of the bills is the perfect analogy of the manner in which the scribes and Pharisees lowered the standards of righteousness as a device for keeping their hold upon the people…” 10
“‘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’” (16:6). The amount of oil in most translations is listed as 100 measures. This figure represents 100 bathous in the original language. The NIV here has the amount represented as nine hundred gallons (2406 liters). The manager cuts this amount in half. Keener estimates the total at 850 gallons and informs us that it would represent the yield of almost 150 olive trees and a value of approximately 1,000 denarii. He notes that these debtors are relatively well-to-do and would possibly need managers in the future.11 Simply, the manager was buying favor for himself with his master’s money.
“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’” (16:7). Most of the modern translations list this as 1000 measures. The Greek is korous, based on the Hebrew cor.12 Bock calculates the total: “The wheat debt was 1,100 bushels or 3,930 liters. This debt was 2,500-3,000 denarii, or twelve to fifteen years’ salary for the average laborer.” 13 Guthrie says, “Since oil was cheaper, the reductions were about equal.” 14
“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” (16:8). There has been a lot of discussion about how this parable is to be interpreted. Barker and Kohlenberger say, “The most likely interpretation couples v. 8a with the parable, so that the rich master in the story is the one who commends the dishonest steward…” 15 There seems to be little reason at first for the master to commend the one who has just stolen from him. Calvin comments: “To make donations out of what belongs to another man, is an action which is very far from deserving applause…” 16 Perhaps Pett, as we have mentioned, is right in thinking that with the lowered amounts there was also a request for the debtors to pay up their accounts.17 The master would no doubt be happy to receive the unexpected cash flow.
The latter part of verse 8 is not from the lips of the master but seems to be from the Lord. The people of this world do sometimes appear a lot smarter than the children of light regarding the way they handle money and property. They seem to do better at seizing opportunities, making money, making friends and getting ahead in general.18 We used to notice this in the real estate business. The child of this world would make a decision, put down the money and close the deal. However, the children of God would make a decision, put down the money, pray about it, and then try to back out of the contract. One of the agents in our office once came and asked me to start taking all the Christians because they were so wishy washy with their contracts. As Trench says, “The teaching is not that owls can see better than eagles, but that ‘Owls see better than eagles, IN THE DARK!’” 19
Guzik remarks, “If we pursued the kingdom of God with the same vigor and zeal that the children of this world pursue profits and pleasure, we would live in an entirely different world.” 20
“I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings” (16:9). The steward used his master’s money wisely to gain for himself the long-lasting favor of the debtors. That was a smart use of someone else’s money to gain popularity. Although it probably worked, it was obviously wrong. Still, the message for us is to use worldly wealth to gain an eternal standing with God and to be welcomed into the heavenly dwellings. This is not wrong but right. The question is just exactly how can we invest our money in this way? Wiersbe suggests that it might mean winning people to Christ. In doing so we would not only be welcomed by God, but by the ones we had won.21 We might accomplish a similar thing by investing our “filthy lucre” into the world-wide mission programs of our day.
There are numerous ways that we can invest money to help other people. We might give to the poor and homeless, feed the hungry, or help the stranger. It is said of our money that we can’t take it with us. I would add to this, that we can’t even keep it while we are here. However, we can send it on ahead by investing in the Lord’s work. Keener says, “The moral of the story is: Use possessions to serve people…” 22
SOME SHORT TEACHINGS
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. Luke 16:10
Years ago I worked for a certain organization and one day the director in fun shared with us how he had smuggled a book out of the public library without getting caught. I thought the story was a little strange but did not think too much more about it at the time. Years later, this same director proved to be very dishonest in the operation of the organization and was subsequently relieved. If we are dishonest in small things we will also be dishonest in big things.
“So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches?” (16:11). Barnes says, “The riches of this world are false, deceitful, not to be trusted (Luke 16:9); the treasures of heaven are true, faithful, never-failing (Matthew 6:19-20).” 23 If we are not faithful servants with the paltry sums entrusted to us here, God will certainly not trust us with the exceedingly valuable treasures of heaven. Earth is really just a proving ground for heaven.
“And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else’s property, who will give you property of your own?” (16:12). Calvin comments: “We thus ascertain Christ’s meaning to be, that they who are bad stewards of earthly blessings would not be faithful guardians of spiritual gifts…” 24 Again, the earthly property we possess is only loaned to us. It really belongs to the Father in Heaven. If we are not faithful with it, the Father will not trust us with heavenly dwellings, which are far beyond any value we can ever imagine.
“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” (16:13). The Greek word for money is mamona. In later times mamona or mammon became personified as the god of wealth. Through the ages many people have served this god as millions do today. A slave however wholly served one master and could not divide his or her loyalties. The slave did not have the luxury of enjoying spare time. The slave was always on duty. For this reason, it was unthinkable that a slave could serve two masters. The slaves or servants of God today should remember this.
It is tragic today that many people, and some of them Christians, are caught up in the worship and service of mammon. A couple of illustrations of this should suffice:
On a Friday afternoon in 1990, a businessman staggered to the steps of his Los Angeles office. Before he died of the gunshot wound to his chest, he called out the names of his three children. But he still had his $10,000 Rolex watch clutched in his hand. He was the victim of a rash of Rolex robberies – and was killed as a sacrifice to his god.
A 1992 story in the Los Angeles Times told about Michelle, a successful writer and editor, who fears the day her husband might discover her secret stash of credit cards, her secret post office box or the other tricks she uses to hide how much money she spends shopping for herself. “I make as much money as my husband . . . If I want a $500 suit from Ann Taylor, I deserve it and don’t want to be hassled about it. So the easiest thing to do is lie,” she explains. Last year, when her husband forced her to destroy one of her credit cards, Michelle went out and got a new one without telling him. “I do live in fear. If he discovers this new VISA, he’ll kill me.” 25
It is impossible to serve both God and money. We will end up hating one and serving the other or vice versa (cf. Matt. 6:24). Bock says, “…Possessions are a responsibility. Their use is a test of character, values and stewardship.” 26
“The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. He said to them, ‘You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight” (16:14-15). The Pharisees pretended to be lovers of God and his law but in truth they were secret lovers of money. They sneered at Jesus for his teaching. The word sneering here is the Greek exemuktērizon means to scoff or turn up one’s nose.27 We will see in 20:47, that these teachers made lengthy prayers while at the same time they devoured the houses of poor widows.
Barclay says, “The Jew tended to connect earthly prosperity with goodness; wealth was a sign that a man was a good man.” 28 But with the appearing of the kingdom of God these old ideas were no longer valid. The things the Pharisees valued were detestable in God’s eyes (cf. 1 Sam. 16:7). The Pharisees claimed to follow Moses but at the same time they rejected the one about whom Moses spoke (Deut. 18:15).
MORE TEACHINGS
The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing their way into it. Luke 16:16
The Bible makes it very clear that with the advent of John the Baptist a new era was introduced. John was the greatest person of the old era but the least person of the new (Matt. 11:11-13). With John, the kingdom of God began to be preached and it was up to people to force their way into it. Morris quoting Geldenhuys says, “There may be the thought of pressing into the kingdom with the greatest earnestness, self-denial and determination, as though with spiritual violence…” 29 There was in a sense a paradigm shift (see comments on 6:24-25) in spiritual understanding. Old concepts of the righteous being blessed with riches were totally changed. From this point on, wealth was looked upon almost as a disadvantage for God’s saints. There was now a higher standard of love, sacrifice and service that would motivate the Lord’s followers.
“It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law” (16:17). The NKJ and other versions here mention jot and tittle in reference to the small decorative marks attached to the Hebrew letters of the Old Testament. Not even these decorative marks would disappear from the Hebrew letters until all was fulfilled. With this we see the importance of the Old Testament and the law.
Some people read Romans 10:4 and think that Christ is the end of the law. Nothing could be further from the truth. They need to read the whole verse. Jesus did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it (Matt. 5:17). Clearly, the Law of the Lord will last forever (Psa. 119:152). We are to meditate on that law day and night (Psa. 1:2). We are to love the law (Psa. 119:113). Jesus is even today busy writing the law on the hearts of Christians (Jer. 31:33). It is our heritage forever (Psa. 119:111). Jesus, who kept the law perfectly, will help us keep it in us through the power of his Holy Spirit within us (Phil. 2:13).
The law will someday go forth from Jerusalem and regulate all the affairs of earth (Isa. 2:3). In the Book of Revelation we may be surprised to see Christians of the last day who are keeping the law along with the testimony of Jesus (Rev. 12:17; 14:12).
“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery” (16:18). This is a very strict teaching based upon God’s original law of marriage (Matt. 19:3-12). It is mitigated somewhat by Matthew 5:32, where the Lord lists sexual immorality as a possible reason for divorce. It is further softened by the later teaching of Paul, sometimes called the Pauline Exception or Pauline Privilege found in 1 Corinthians 7:10-15. In this teaching a Christian who is married to an unbeliever can be divorced if the unbeliever chooses to leave.
The law of God did permit divorce under certain circumstances (Deut. 24:1ff.). However, The Pharisees and other leaders in Israel took a very liberal view of marriage. The more conservative school of Shammai taught that marriage could be broken for the cause of adultery alone. The school of Hillel said it could be broken for many reasons, even if a woman spoiled a dish of food or talked to a strange man. The highly esteemed Rabbi Akiba said that a marriage bond could be broken simply if a man found a woman that was fairer than his wife. In Jesus time, things had gotten so bad that some women were refusing to marry.30 The Pharisees and others were boasting how they kept the law but at the same time they were destroying the law of marriage.
Today in the 21st century we are probably not doing too much better than the Pharisees in Jesus’ time. The divorce rate among our clergy today is increasing faster than that of any other profession.31 According to the Barna Research Group the rate of divorce among non-Christians in the US is 23 percent, while the rate among Christians is higher at 27 percent.32 Somehow, we have a disconnect when it comes to the word of God.
THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS
There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. Luke 16:19
Jesus has already spoken of the dangers of wealth. Now he presents an especially vivid story, told only in Luke, of one who was essentially destroyed by wealth. This rich man was dressed in purple. Purple clothing was very expensive since it was often colored with the rare purple dye from the Mediterranean murex shell. Only rulers and the very rich were able to wear such clothing. He also wore undergarments of fine linen, probably imported from the banks of the Nile in Egypt. This linen was especially soft and white, and so expensive that only princes, priests and the very rich could afford it.33 Not only did this rich man wear purple and fine linen, but he lived in luxury every day. It seems that he was in the habit of banqueting almost constantly.
His story is not just about money but it is about reality, about indolent self-indulgence, and about the roots of one’s heart.34 It is about the future reversal of the human condition; about eternity; about rags to riches; about severe judgment for those who fail to perceive the image of God in all the humanity around them. Ross Douthat quoting St. Basil the Great of the fourth century says: “The bread that you possess belongs to the hungry. The clothes that you store in boxes, belong to the naked. The shoes rotting by you, belong to the bare-foot. The money that you hide belongs to anyone in need…” 35
“At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores” (16:20-21). The beggar was a poor wretch of a person. He was probably crippled, since he was laid at the gate. It seems that the rich man did nothing to alleviate his situation. He longed to eat the crumbs that fell from the rich man’s table. We have no indication that he got to eat them. It seems that he might have starved to death in the rich man’s presence.
Since he was likely crippled he was probably not able to get near the table to feast on the crumbs. In those days there were no napkins. People wiped their hands on the bread and dropped it on the floor.36 The scavenger dogs probably dined on the bread before they went out to lick the sores of poor, hungry Lazarus. Incidentally, Lazarus (God helps in Hebrew) has a name. He is the only person named in all of Jesus’ parables.37 The rich man, despite all his wealth and influence, has no name. Sometimes he is called Dives, which is the Latin for “rich man.” 38
The rich man probably looked upon Lazarus as one who was cursed by God. According to Old Testament theology, as we have seen, to be rich was to be blessed by God and to be poor was to be cursed. We have now seen how the kingdom of God radically changed that theology.
VIEW FROM THE OTHER SIDE
The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. Luke 16:22
This is one of the very few views we have of the afterlife in the Bible. We see here a vast difference between these two people. Lazarus died and was carried by the angels to Father Abraham’s side. The rich man died and was buried. John Donne once said that death was a great leveler, but there is nothing level about this picture.
“In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side (16:23). The rich man found himself in Hades, that abode of the dead. This is the Greek word for Sheol in the Old Testament. We learn here that Hades had two compartments. One was called Paradise, where Father Abraham and Old Testament saints resided. It was a place of great blessing. On the other side of Hades was the place of punishment for the wicked. There was a great chasm between the two. Wiersbe says, “…If Hell is a permanent prison of the damned, then Hades is the temporary jail, and the suffering in both is very real…” 39 Wiersbe goes on to say, “It is believed by many theologians that our Lord emptied the Paradise part of Hades when he arose from the dead and returned to the Father (Jn. 20:17; Eph. 4:8-10). We know that today “Paradise” is in heaven, where Jesus reigns in glory (Lk. 23:43; 2 Cor. 12:1-4).” 40
Today, because of the Resurrection, there is no waiting in Paradise for the saints of God. Upon death they go immediately to Heaven and to the presence of the Lord Jesus (2 Cor. 5:6-8).41 This passage clearly does away with the false ideas of soul-sleep, reincarnation and Purgatory.
“So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire’” (16:24). We see something very interesting and amazing here. The selfish nature of the rich man is unchanged, even in the world to come. He still looks upon Lazarus as a “nothing” who could be sent to Hell just to cool his tongue with water. We must remember that now is the time for the change and reformation of our lives. When our little days are over our nature will be fixed forever. We need to remember also that punishment will begin at the moment of death for the ungodly. Despite what many say today Hell is a place of burning.42 What a topsy-turvy place the afterlife will come will be. “The rich man becomes the beggar, while the beggar is now the rich man.” 43 The one who showed no mercy now asks for mercy.44
“But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony’” (16:25). The Pharisees always thought of themselves as children of Abraham (Matt. 3:8-9; Jn. 8:37-44) but they were sadly mistaken, just like this rich man.
“And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us” (16:26). We note here that in the afterlife there will be absolutely no passing from one state to another.45 It is interesting that the rich man made no such request of Abraham. The Greek word for chasm is chasma, meaning a great gulf, or broad yawning space.46 It is clear that there is no crossing over in death, but rather it is a permanent sealing of one’s eternal destiny.
“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment’” (16:27-28). It is truly interesting that in Hades the rich man becomes a missionary. He suddenly has a great concern for his five living brothers. This should be a wake-up call for us today as we live in complacency. People by the millions are sliding into an eternal Hell where they will suffer punishment forever. If we but reach out our hand we might save some of them.
“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them’” (16:29). Here we see that the Old Testament had the ability to turn a person away from eternal loss. By their obedience and faithfulness to Old Testament teaching, people were directed away from destruction and pointed to the coming Messiah, who could save their souls. In a sense, Old Testament saints were looking forward to Christ while New Testament saints are looking back to Christ. What an authentication the Lord gives to Old Testament Scriptures!
“‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent’” (16:30). Pett says that this man was a typical Jew because he was seeking signs. The Jewish people always sought after signs.47 We have already seen how signs alone could not convince unbelievers. It is amazing how many signs Jesus worked for the Jews and yet they simply yawned and walked away in their unbelief.
“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead’” (16:31). In fact, a man with the same name of Lazarus was raised from the dead by Jesus (Jn. 11:38-44). Not only did the Pharisees and other leaders not believe, they rather plotted to kill this Lazarus (Jn. 12:9-10). Then the same group of leaders heard astounding proof that Jesus himself was raised from the dead and they still did not believe. Coffman says, “…if the ordinary means of grace cannot reach us, we need not expect the extraordinary.” 48