Luke 16:1-13
A. INTRODUCTION
These days, it is not unusual to hear stories of conmen. People who cheat others out of their savings; people who pad accounts; people who thin down petrol at the bowser; people who seem to appear with regular monotony on television current affairs programmes. And, it seems, as often as they get caught out, they seem to move on and start all over again. They just don’t seem to learn the lessons from being caught out.
On top of that, it also seems a regular occurrence that we hear of business failures, There are the big spectacular failures, and there are any number of smaller businesses going under every day.
Of course not every business fails because of mismanagement. Sometimes it can be a lack of demand for a product; sometimes it’s a matter of not keeping up to date; and sometimes it’s simply a matter of overheads exceeding income. Still, the result is the same—a lot of people are usually left out of pocket, disadvantaged, and often in trouble of their own.
Of course with the standard business collapse there is a measure of protection for the creditors. There are rules to how the remaining funds are distributed—the order in which people get paid. However, when it comes to the dodgy deals—the conmen of the world—there are no such guarantees.
And should we think that all of this is some modern-day phenomenon, then a passage like this, from Luke, comes along. And it highlights that questionable business practices, and dodgy dealings, have been around for thousands of years.
B. THE PARABLE OF THE SHREWD MANAGER (1-8)
1. Story
Indeed, it’s the story of an estate manager—a man appointed by a very rich absentee owner/landlord—who had been given considerable legal powers by the owner to run his business. But the owner became aware of irregularities in the business—and had a suspicion, but not proof, that the manager had been negligent in his duties. Indeed, the owner’s affairs had not been run properly; his good name had been undermined in some way. And so he placed some very serious charges of misconduct at the manager’s feet. Charges which would result in the dismissal of the manager should they be found to be correct.
Now, as I said, the owner did not have proof. So the manager was given a chance to present a case to prove his innocence—a chance to prove that he had been completely open and honest, and that it wasn’t him who had brought the owner’s name into disrepute.
But the manager, obviously, knew his guilt; he knew that he’d done wrong. So he was faced with a dilemma. He knew that if he was dismissed he would have nowhere to go—no one would want to employ him. He may have felt shame, but he knew that he had to do something to improve his own future. And he had a bit of time up his sleeve, because the owner wasn’t going to dismiss him before he had made his case. So he put the time that he had to good use; he made plans that would increase his future prospects.
And then, what was the most extraordinary thing happened. This manager—who was accused of wrong doing and who had already been caught out—did it all again:
He called in the various clients that he had had dealings with—the people who had bought on credit from the estate—and he gave back the handwritten guarantees (or IOUs) that they had given him. And to the first person, he told him to replace his first IOU with another for half the amount. And to the second, he told him to replace his original IOU with another for 80% of the amount.
2. Interpretation A
Now, on the surface this manager seems no different to the conmen of our own society. On the surface, it appears that he thought he had more hope for the future by currying favours with his (to be) ex-clients, than he had by trying to appease the owner of the business. Or so it seems.
However, I’m going to tell you that there’s a twist in this story regarding the business practices of the day. Practices which are not obvious to the casual reader today, but would have been well known to the disciples, listening to this story.
3. Interpretation B
Because it was normal in New Testament times for an amount of interest to be included in transactions. Indeed 50% interest was not unusual in Egypt at the time. However, it was also normal for Jews not to charge each other interest, in accordance with God’s command (as recorded in Deuteronomy) (Deuteronomy 23:19).
Jewish businessmen, then, faced a dilemma—how to charge interest to fellow Jews without it appearing that interest was being charged at all. The solution? The common practice was to pad the accounts. And 100% padding of an account for olive oil, and a 25% padding for wheat although totally unethical, and illegal, would not have been unusual. And this brings the story into a completely different light.
Because when the manager appears, generously, to let the debtors off part of their bill, the manager is not being generous at all. All he was doing was removing the interest (which should not have been charged in the first place) and restoring the debts to their correct amounts.
And by reducing the amounts each debtor owed, it would not only have won him considerable favour with the debtors who had much less to pay, but it created the situation where the owner of the business could applaud the servant’s return to legal dealings and, at the same time, the owner could bask in the undeserved reputation for fair dealing that had been restored.
Far from being typical of the conmen of our day, then, this is a story of a conman who was not only caught out, but faced up to his impending judgement. He accepted his failings and he returned to honest dealings.
C. THE POINT OF THE STORY (incl v9)
As a consequence, we should ask, ‘What’s the point of the story?’ Well, there are at least three things to note.
Because, firstly, it was directed to the disciples. Yes, there were Pharisees there, but this was a message directed fairly and squarely at the disciples.
Secondly, the story is about stewardship, and about the proper stewardship of the worldly wealth that is entrusted to all disciples by God.
And thirdly, and the application provided by Jesus himself regarding the use of worldly wealth (v9), is that worldly wealth, with which disciples are endowed, should be used to help others, (with the obvious view of trying to win disciples). An act which was (and still is) high on the approval rating of God.
Now, of course, all this is very positive. But the story does have negative connotations too. The Pharisees who were looking on, would not have missed the dig at them. As stewards, who were mismanaging God’s wealth, the implication was that they were misusing God’s wealth and that they would be held to account, and what they had would be taken away.
Unlike the conmen, and mismanagers of this world—who face the legal and social pressures that society places upon them—those who misuse God’s gifts, will be called to account. And, as a consequence, will face the judgement of God himself.
So then, the parable is a warning to be good stewards, good managers of the things God entrusts in our keeping. In other words, good stewards of the gifts, talents, skills, and abilities that he gives us; good stewards of our time and opportunities provided; good stewards of our knowledge, possessions, and money. Good stewards of . . . Well, you get the picture—the list goes on.
D. FAITHFUL STEWARDSHIP (10-13)
All very powerful stuff. And lest people misunderstand where Jesus was coming from, he added in the following comments:
Firstly, that faithfulness is not determined by the amount entrusted to a believer. Rather it is the character of the person who uses what is provided. A sobering thought for any who would like to laud it over others.
Secondly, that in this world we do not have any personal riches. Everything we have is entrusted to us by God.
Thirdly, the faithful will be rewarded in the next life with true riches—riches that this time will truly belong to them. And riches which have an abiding and permanent quality.
And, fourthly, a warning. We cannot have two masters. If we try to serve someone or something else—if we do something else with the riches to which we are entrusted—then we will fail to give God the exclusive loyalty he demands.
E. CONCLUSION
Now, we started with the conmen and the mismanagers of the world—people who are either greedy or negligent; people we seem to hear about day by day; people who even when they get caught seem to just move on and start somewhere else.
In contrast to that, however, we have this story from Luke’s gospel. The parable that Jesus told about a conman, but a conman who when caught did an about turn and returned to honest dealings.
The message from Jesus—the message for today, then—is that we own nothing, that everything is his. And everything we have is entrusted to us by God.
Now, this isn’t a story of ‘do certain things and you will be saved’. It’s not like that at all. This story was addressed fairly and squarely to people who were already believers. No! This story is about our attitude as believers; it’s about how we manage the things entrusted to us by God.
Now, none of us are perfect, least of all me. We all fail in our duty to God. The challenge today, then, is to examine the way we use the things with which we are entrusted and examine how we respond when we discover or are faced with our failings.
Today—when we make mistakes, when we discover that our stewardship is not all that it should be—we have a choice. We can be like the conmen of our day. When we find out our failings, we can carry on and do it all over again (and face the judgment of God). Or we can be like the manager in the parable and face up to our faults and weaknesses. And with God’s help do a U-turn, and return to God’s way.
Posted: 12th September 2024
© 2024, Brian A Curtis
www.brianacurtis.com.au
