The Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-18)

[Hiddenthings]

By common consent, this is considered Jesus’ most perplexing parable, but the puzzling part is often more in his commentary than in the story itself. The narrative is vivid and engaging, rich with detail.

A rich man heard that his steward was “wasting his goods” (the same phrase used in the story of the prodigal son!). Alarmed, he summoned the steward and demanded an account of his management. Dismissal seemed inevitable.

The steward thought anxiously about his predicament. Another lucrative job was out of the question. he was unfit for manual farm labor, and the very idea of it horrified him. Even the thought of becoming a professional beggar filled him with dread. Though he had no shame in misappropriating his master’s money, he felt deep shame at the idea of begging. Where had all the money he had fraudulently diverted gone? Surely, he had lived a life of indulgent extravagance as well.

Suddenly, an idea struck him: “I know what to do! I can make my master’s debtors into my friends.”

He called each debtor in turn. “What do you owe my lord?” he asked the first. “A hundred measures of oil? Here is your adjusted account, reduce it to fifty.” That debt represented the yield of about 150 olive trees. The next owed a hundred measures of wheat, the produce of roughly 100 acres and the steward reduced it to eighty, calculating who could be influenced more cheaply. He repeated this process for all outstanding debts, securing both their loyalty and their silence without directly incriminating himself.

When the master learned how the steward had been received by the debtors, his admiration was readily imagined. Unaware of the underhand dealings, he praised the man for acting shrewdly and being popular with the debtors.

The parable subtly links the steward’s “wisdom” to the craftiness of the serpent in Eden (Gen. 3:1 LXX), highlighting shrewdness used with cunning foresight.

 

[Hiddenthings]

The Wise Use of Wealth – What Was Jesus Teaching?

The parable of the unjust steward is one of the most perplexing that Jesus ever gave. Nearly everyone agrees on that point. But is it possible to arrive at an interpretation that adequately addresses the many problems within the parable and its context?

Take, for example, the explanation most often put forward. According to this view, Jesus was not commending the steward’s dishonesty, but rather his diligence and foresight in pursuing his own advantage. The lesson, then, would be: “If only you, my disciples, would show the same determination in seeking your eternal good as this man did in securing his temporal welfare! Use mammon, money and the things of this world, not selfishly, but in a way that advances your standing before God. If you are faithful with such things, you can be trusted with the greater riches of the Gospel.”

But this interpretation is far from satisfying, for several reasons: (discussion points)

1. How can money used in the service of God still be called “the mammon of unrighteousness”?
2. Who are the “friends” gained by this means who can provide “everlasting habitations”? Certainly not human beings. But if the point is eternal reward, is this not perilously close to justification by works?
3. Jesus himself applies the parable, at least in part, to the Pharisees: “You are those who justify yourselves before men” (v.15) just as the steward did.
4. The immediate context (vv.16–18) has nothing to do with wealth or money. Any adequate explanation must make sense of these verses too.
5. In this “common” interpretation, only one lesson is drawn from the parable, whereas in others (such as the Sower, the Tares, or the Dragnet) there is a consistent correspondence between details of the story and their meaning.
6. If the lesson were simply “use wealth rightly,” verse 11 would make little sense: “If you have not been faithful in unrighteous wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches?” This hardly applies to disciples who already had the gospel and likely very little money.
7. Most troubling of all is verse 9: “Make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous wealth, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal dwellings.” Taken at face value, this seems to urge imitation not just of the steward’s zeal, but also of his questionable methods! Clearly, another way of understanding this parable must be sought.

If these questions are handled thoughtfully and in the light of God’s Word, they should open the way for rich discussion, and, God willing, not too many arguments!

 

[Hiddenthings]

A Drastic Alternative

Bullinger, in The Companion Bible, offers a typically neat solution to the difficulty of verse 9, truly the crux of the passage. He suggests that the words should be read as a rhetorical question expecting a negative answer: “And do I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when ye fail they may receive you into everlasting habitations? Certainly not!”

This reading avoids the main difficulties by casting the steward as an example to be avoided. except, perhaps, in his dedication to self-interest. Yet such a solution can only be reached by doing violence to the original text, a surprising oversight from a scholar otherwise known for his precision. For the verse to be read in this way, the negative particle mē would be required, but it is absent from all manuscripts (contrast its presence in rhetorical questions such as Luke 17:9 and 10:15, RV).

Even if this grammatical liberty were permissible, the problem of the “everlasting habitations” would remain. Such corrupt dealings as those of the steward could only lead to an everlasting grave. Could Jesus really have meant that?

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Even if this grammatical liberty were permissible, the problem of the “everlasting habitations” would remain. Such corrupt dealings as those of the steward could only lead to an everlasting grave. Could Jesus really have meant that?

I don’t think that is what Jesus meant. Considering make friends with the unrighteousness mammon, so that when it fails, they will receive you into eternal habitation(s) …One body, many members.
key there I think is “when it fails”. There is a thread that runs through where God hands them over to a reprobate mind. Jesus counsels: go make friends with the unrighteousness mammon, so that when it fails.. Here is another: 1 Timothy 1:20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
What do all three have in common …here is another, 1 Corinthians 5:5 To deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

“go make you friends of the unrighteousness mammon, so that when it fails”…for the destruction of the flesh(when it fails), that spirit may be saved…who are “they” in that “they” may receive you into everlasting habitation? Do we go to God when the unrighteousness mammon fails? Personally I don’t see anything “the grave” or “death” only God’s forgiveness, Grace, Mercy and Truth receiving anyone after they fail in the unrighteous mammon. In fact, when it’s lost it’s savour men toss it out and trample it under foot. Surely, they don’t “intreat” to receive you back after it fails.

Think about Psalm 30:8-12 To you, O LORD, I cry, and to the Lord I plead for mercy: [9] "What profit is there in my death, if I go down to the pit? Will the dust praise you? Will it tell of your faithfulness? [10] Hear, O LORD, and be merciful to me! O LORD, be my helper!" [11] You have turned for me my mourning into dancing; you have loosed my sackcloth and clothed me with gladness, [12] that my glory may sing your praise and not be silent. O LORD my God, I will give thanks to you forever!

It’s a beautiful loving thing (Imo) that Jesus says …coming not to destroy men, but to save them(can’t that be through the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved?)—telling them to go make friends with the unrighteous mammon, so that when it fails, they may be received into eternal habitation. Another similar is Revelation 3:17-19 KJV
Because you say, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and know not that you are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: [18] I counsel you to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that you may be rich; (made that red because where Paul (Christ in him) spoke of as poor, yet making many rich and it’s not about money) and white raiment, that you may be clothed(with the New Man), and that the shame of your nakedness do not appear; and anoint your eyes with eyesalve, that you may see. [19] As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
I don’t know how others hear that, but to me it aligns with Jesus (counsel) for them to go make friends with the unrighteous mammon, so that (not if) but “when” it fails …they will receive you (when you return) “restored” “be you reconciled” unto God.

 

[Hiddenthings]

A Fresh Approach

A much simpler solution is available, one that allows for an unforced interpretation of the details in harmony with the context.

Jesus’ words are: “Make to yourselves friends of (ek) the mammon of unrighteousness.” This is commonly understood to mean: “Make friends on the basis of, or by means of, the mammon of unrighteousness.” While this translation may be correct, it is not the only possibility.

The preposition ek can also indicate separation, yielding the opposite idea: “Make to yourselves friends away from, apart from, the mammon of unrighteousness.” This usage of ek—signifying separation—is noted in Liddell and Scott’s Lexicon, and numerous examples appear in the New Testament, such as:

• Luke 16:31: “though one rose from the dead.”
• Luke 16:4: “when I am put out of the stewardship.”
• Luke 23:55: “which came with him from Galilee.”
• Acts 1:25: “this apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell.”
• Acts 3:23: “shall be destroyed from among the people.”
• Acts 7:3: “Get thee out of thy country and from thy kindred.”
• Acts 7:10: “delivered him out of all his afflictions.”
• 1 Corinthians 5:13: “Put away from among yourselves that wicked person.”
• Revelation 2:21: “And I gave her space to repent of her fornication.”

With this understanding, it becomes clear that not only the perplexing verse 9, but the entire parable, serves as a warning: to avoid allowing worldly, unscrupulous behavior to compromise the faithful administration of God’s holy law.

 

[Hiddenthings]

The details align well.

In the parable, the rich man represents God Himself. The steward, who had neither faithfully preserved his master’s goods nor rightly distributed them but instead squandered them, symbolizes (v.15) the Pharisees and lawyers. These men, because of their religious and social position, had become administrators of God’s law to the nation.

The first warning of coming judgment (v.2) was given through John the Baptist (Luke 3:8). Just as the steward, about to be dismissed for his unfaithfulness sought to secure his future by underhanded dealings, so too the Pharisees, before God finally rejected them, acted with cunning to maintain their standing among men. They achieved this by greatly reducing the weight of men’s obligations to God and to one another, thereby preserving their own influence while disregarding God’s true requirements.

Like the steward, they were truly “children of this world.” In securing their own temporary advantage, they showed more craftiness than the “children of light” (Christ’s disciples) would later display in pursuing their eternal inheritance.

It is important to note that Jesus addressed this parable to his disciples. His intention was to warn them: when they themselves were entrusted with positions of authority in his church, as God’s stewards (Luke 12:42) they must not follow the example of the Pharisees, but instead administer faithfully the principles of his teaching.

 

[ScottA]

By common consent, this is considered Jesus’ most perplexing parable, but the puzzling part is often more in his commentary than in the story itself. The narrative is vivid and engaging, rich with detail.

A rich man heard that his steward was “wasting his goods” (the same phrase used in the story of the prodigal son!). Alarmed, he summoned the steward and demanded an account of his management. Dismissal seemed inevitable.

The steward thought anxiously about his predicament. Another lucrative job was out of the question. he was unfit for manual farm labor, and the very idea of it horrified him. Even the thought of becoming a professional beggar filled him with dread. Though he had no shame in misappropriating his master’s money, he felt deep shame at the idea of begging. Where had all the money he had fraudulently diverted gone? Surely, he had lived a life of indulgent extravagance as well.

Suddenly, an idea struck him: “I know what to do! I can make my master’s debtors into my friends.”

He called each debtor in turn. “What do you owe my lord?” he asked the first. “A hundred measures of oil? Here is your adjusted account, reduce it to fifty.” That debt represented the yield of about 150 olive trees. The next owed a hundred measures of wheat, the produce of roughly 100 acres and the steward reduced it to eighty, calculating who could be influenced more cheaply. He repeated this process for all outstanding debts, securing both their loyalty and their silence without directly incriminating himself.

When the master learned how the steward had been received by the debtors, his admiration was readily imagined. Unaware of the underhand dealings, he praised the man for acting shrewdly and being popular with the debtors.

The parable subtly links the steward’s “wisdom” to the craftiness of the serpent in Eden (Gen. 3:1 LXX), highlighting shrewdness used with cunning foresight.

Are you paraphrasing or quoting from some modern translation of the scriptures?

 

[Hiddenthings]

Are you paraphrasing or quoting from some modern translation of the scriptures?

Paraphrasing from the KJV mostly.

 

[ScottA]

Paraphrasing from the KJV mostly.

Thanks it seemed curiously off...and from it, the para is indeed off.

The parable of the unjust steward is like that of most parables: There is a moral, a spiritual message, and the object is never the subject.

The spiritual message is this:

As with Jacob, Joseph, Nehemiah, Daniel, and many others--even Christ--we are to work with what we have, and thus will be rewarded the greater things of God. Each worked among or for the unjust, even doing their bidding, but each found a way of doing so without personal offense to God. They got their hands dirty, but maintained a cleanliness wherever they could--they did their best, and did so fairly, justly...as the best of captives might blamelessly do under duress.​

​

While in the world, we too are captives--alive in God, but remaining in this world and subject to suffering. Even so, we are called to faithfully act even amidst the devil's worst.​

 

[Hiddenthings]

Thanks it seemed curiously off...and from it, the para is indeed off.

The parable of the unjust steward, is like that of most parables: There is a moral, a spiritual message, and the object is never the subject.

The spiritual message is this:

As with Jacob, Joseph, Nehemiah, Daniel, and many other--even Christ--we are to work with what we have, and thus will be rewarded the greater things of God. Each worked among or for the unjust, even doing their bidding, but each found a way of doing so without personal offense to God. They got their hands dirty, but maintained a cleanliness where ever they could--they did their best, and did so fairly, justly...as the best of captives might blamelessly do under duress.​

​

While in the world, we too are captives--alive in God, but remaining in this world and subject to suffering. Even so, we are called to faithfully act even amidst the devil's worst.​

Scott, you need the context first then base your understanding from those hearing the message.

 

[Hiddenthings]

A New Stewardship​

So Jesus urged his disciples: You must make better friends, my Father and myself, by carefully avoiding the methods of the Pharisees. Then, when the old order fails (when the temple is destroyed and the Mosaic system comes to an end), you will be welcomed into “eternal tabernacles.”

This phrase contains a striking paradox. Tabernacles, tents, are temporary by nature, yet here they symbolize the tabernacles of the Messianic age: the church that would soon replace Judaism as the spiritual home of God’s people.

Jesus added: “He who is faithful in very little (the Law of Moses) will also be faithful in much (the teaching of Christ). And he who is unrighteous in very little (Moses) will also be unrighteous in much (Christ).” This contrast between the stewardship of the Law and the stewardship of Christ’s church runs throughout the entire passage.

The repeated use of “mammon” has misled many into thinking Jesus was speaking of money. In reality, He was drawing on the imagery of the parable: the steward’s “mammon” represented the Pharisees’ misuse of their stewardship. Jesus was not teaching prudence in finances, but faithfulness in God’s service.

Thus He declared: “If you have not been faithful with unrighteous mammon (that is, if you have corrupted the principles of the Old Covenant), who will entrust you with the true riches?” The Greek word for “true” regularly contrasts the New Covenant with the Old.

Paul seems to echo this sober warning in his charge to Timothy: “O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you” (1 Tim. 6:20), and again: “By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you” (2 Tim. 1:14).

Jesus pressed the contrast further: “And if you have not been faithful in that which belongs to another, who will give you what is your own?” The Law of Moses was given to magnify the holiness and glory of God, but the gospel brings an even greater revelation—emphasizing forgiveness and redemption for sinners.

When the Pharisees heard Jesus repeat his references to “mammon,” they assumed he was mocking their love of money. With no real answer to his teaching, they reacted with open ridicule. Their misunderstanding, thinking that the parable concerned financial shrewdness ironically confirms that Jesus’ message was about something deeper. Only later, in his final parable (Luke 20:19), did His opponents begin to grasp his true meaning. Even the disciples themselves sometimes misunderstood him (Matt. 15:5; 16:7).

 

[Hiddenthings]

The Failures of Pharisaism​

Jesus urged his listeners to reconsider the parable, for it was meant to portray the Pharisees themselves: “You are the ones who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. What is exalted among men, your status and reputation sought at the expense of true religion is detestable in God’s sight.”

Here Jesus chose a word that, in the Old Testament, was reserved for idolatry. Luke, with his medical background, also used it as a technical term for nausea. The message was blunt: You Pharisees make God sick.

He continued: “The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of the Law to fail.”

That phrase “forcing his way into it” could be paraphrased: “handling it roughly.” The same Greek word is used in Exodus 19:24 (LXX), when Israel at Sinai was warned: “Do not let the priests or the people break through to approach the Lord.” Bagster’s Septuagint even notes: “Luke 16:16 perhaps refers to this passage.” In other words, what Israel did not dare to attempt physically, the Pharisees brazenly attempted spiritually (cf. John 10:1). By twisting the moral demands of the Law, they exceeded even the later casuistry of the Jesuits. As Jesus had summarized it in the parable: “Take your bill and write eighty.”

To illustrate, Jesus corrected their distortion of God’s marriage law: “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and whoever marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.” The principles of God’s will for marriage were straightforward, yet the Pharisees bent them to suit their convenience, using their religious authority to dilute divine truth and lessen moral responsibility.

The Gospels record other examples of such Pharisaic evasions. A man might swear an oath “by the temple,” and it would mean nothing. But if he swore “by the gold of the temple” (the golden altar or mercy seat), then it was considered binding. Such artificial distinctions allowed men to cheat in business deals while dishonoring the God for whose glory the temple stood.

In the same way, they made it possible to ignore the sacred duty of supporting aged parents. Through their cynical invention of Corban, declaring wealth dedicated “to God” (in name only), they excused themselves from caring for father or mother. It was this particular abuse that stirred Jesus to righteous anger, leading Him to quote with severity: “In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9).

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Jesus added: “He who is faithful in very little (the Law of Moses) will also be faithful in much (the teaching of Christ). And he who is unrighteous in very little (Moses) will also be unrighteous in much (Christ).” This contrast between the stewardship of the Law and the stewardship of Christ’s church runs throughout the entire passage.

he who is unrighteous in very little will also be unrighteous in much. Makes me think of
James 2:10 For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point (little)has become guilty of (much)all of it.

 

[ScottA]

Scott, you need the context first then base your understanding from those hearing the message.

No, that would be a tail wagging the dog approach, and the error of many.

To the contrary, the context is God's and may be unknown for centuries, if not even until the end. Messages from God do not require any such thing, but requires that we yield in spirit, laying down our worldly frame of understanding--like a child. Context--ha--context is often even given over to Satan! But those hearing, are simply to hear and be prompted in spirit, by the Spirit.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

So Jesus urged his disciples: You must make better friends, my Father and myself, by carefully avoiding the methods of the Pharisees. Then, when the old order fails (when the temple is destroyed and the Mosaic system comes to an end), you will be welcomed into “eternal tabernacles.”

This phrase contains a striking paradox. Tabernacles, tents, are temporary by nature, yet here they symbolize the tabernacles of the Messianic age: the church that would soon replace Judaism as the spiritual home of God’s people.

If I understand you correctly. When the old order fails —-LOVE you connected it to the destruction of the temple (something I had never considered ) —when the old order fails and comes to an end….you will be welcomed into “eternal habitations”. Do I understand you correctly that hell is not the eternal habitations that will receive them after it fails, comes to an end?

 

[Hiddenthings]

No, that would be a tail wagging the dog approach, and the error of many.

To the contrary, the context is God's and may be unknown for centuries, if not even until the end. Messages from God do not require any such thing, but requires that we yield in spirit, laying down our worldly frame of understanding--like a child. Context--ha--context is often even given over to Satan! But those hearing, are simply to hear and be prompted in spirit, by the Spirit.

If you can't speak to the context what are you speaking to?

 

[Hiddenthings]

A Like Danger in the Church​

The parable of the unjust steward, together with Jesus’ own explanation, served as a sharp exposure of the Pharisees’ corrupt practice of twisting God’s law with human cleverness. More than that, it was a direct warning to his apostles: soon they would hold positions of authority and responsibility within the Lord’s household. They too would face the temptation to compromise, to soften the demanding standards of Christ’s teaching for the sake of convenience or human approval. “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of the Law to fail” (v.17) whether the Law of Moses then, or the law of Christ now. Paul seems to have read the parable in this light, applying it to his own stewardship in the ecclesias (1 Cor. 4:1–5). @dak

Who can say that such a warning has ever been unnecessary? From the earliest days, the church has wrestled with this very danger: how to resist the slow erosion of Christian truth, both in doctrine and in conduct under the pressures of the world, and how to withstand the subtle lure of trying to live with divided loyalties, straddling both sides of the fence.

Our own generation is no exception. The same challenge persists, and examples of compromise are easy to find.

Thus the parable remains a living warning to all who lead Christ’s church today: without watchfulness and integrity in moral judgment, the same failures will inevitably recur.

 

[Hiddenthings]

If I understand you correctly. When the old order fails —-LOVE you connected it to the destruction of the temple (something I had never considered ) —when the old order fails and comes to an end….you will be welcomed into “eternal habitations”. Do I understand you correctly that hell is not the eternal habitations that will receive them after it fails, comes to an end?

Hell is simply the grave, yet Scripture speaks of it in the strongest terms because of its finality for those who are not found in Christ.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Hell is simply the grave, yet Scripture speaks of it in the strongest terms because of its finality for those who are not found in Christ.

I’ll try to clarify. I’m asking who are “they” in “when you fail”
“they may receive you into eternal habitations”? Luke 16:9 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.

 

[Hiddenthings]

I’ll try to clarify. I’m asking who are “they” in “when you fail”
“they may receive you into eternal habitations”? Luke 16:9 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.

When ye fail (AV) is a reading which will have to be let go. There is too much MS support for RV: "when it fails." In any case, AV can hardly mean, in line with the parable: When you are exposed as failures there will be a much better future for you. RV reading: "when it fails" speaks of the day of God's rejection of the old Mosaic administration, the day when stewardship of the gospel is put in the hands of the apostles.

Only God through Jesus Christ can receive us into everlasting habitations.