| I |
n my scripture reading I recently got hung up on a Luke passage–chapter 16–sensing that I was missing something important. This blog is a touch of rambling regarding some of my understanding relative to Luke’s gospel and our Lord’s word to us. If you think I’m missing the point, feel free to critique.
It appears to me that Luke fills his narrative with limited personal comments, perhaps to announce a theme or move the story along, and then just records Jesus’ word on that particular subject. For instance, at the beginning of ch. 13 the need for repentance is announced, and then several pericopes are provided in support of that theme, including the wrong-headed attitude and direction of those in charge of religion in Jesus’ day, namely the Pharisees. At the close of the same chapter, after Jesus laments Israel’s refusal to seek refuge under His wings, Luke adds parable and pericope, one after the other showing us just what Jesus was up against. Without doubt, Jesus is the protagonist in the story as it unfolds, the religious elite are the antagonists, and light is the gift our Lord is attempting to bring to the world. Jesus shines the light on Israel’s failure to heal the hurting by allowing their misinterpretations of the law to get in the way (beginning of 14), and He shines light on the silliness and temptation of social posturing. Luke wants us to see Jesus’ call to repentance with reference to, and distaste for, self-centeredness, the sort of “me first” attitude that was allowing multitudes to miss the entire banquet (as he moves along in 14). We’re then reminded of the cruciformed nature of true discipleship without which, Jesus notes, we’re as useless as tasteless salt. The antagonists are fed up and complain that Jesus is spending time with the wrong crowd (15). Jesus destroys that objection with a series of stories about lost sheep, coins, and a prodigal young man. The elite are pictured as the grotesque, grumbling, big brother who just can’t understand why the father is so excited about his penitent sibling.
We arrive at ch. 16 and a parable about the dishonest yet cunning manager. And it’s here that Luke helps us see, through Jesus’ words, something important about fallen, human nature. To be brief, I simply note that when the manager’s job was threatened, he didn’t put the screws to the debtors; in fact, he forgave debts to gain favor with the people. And the rich master was impressed with the craftiness of his manager! I know on the surface chapter 16 looks to be mostly about money, but I really think Luke is pushing a deeper point (as with any good writer, Luke presents meaning at different levels in the story). Second temple Israel wanted God to return to the temple. He’d been gone since before the the exile. It looked to them like the “rich master” was punishing Israel for their failed vocation (to be light for the rest of the world as God’s chosen people). Israel’s reaction, in contrast with the manager of ch. 16, was to make life harder on the debtors. If one of the sheep was hurting, they wouldn’t offer healing on the Sabbath even though they’d help an ox out of the ditch. They refused to eat with sinners as they tightened the screws in an effort to be righteous and invite the return of the Lord. The manager glorified the rich master by forgiving debts–whether he intended to or not, he made his master look good. The religious elite were making God look bad, by representing Him as unforgiving, oppressive, heartless, more concerned about the plight of an ox than a prodigal publican, and all the rest.
The Pharisees were chiefly concerned with keeping the law, so they ridiculed Jesus for his teaching (which they saw as a threat to the law). Jesus says, don’t bother yourself; the kingdom is being announced and people are storming into it; and all sorts of dirty, smelly debtors are being forgiven their accounts. At the same time He assures them that not a single period or comma in the law was going to be voided. He even gives them an example that would no doubt scrape against their scabby, lustful hearts–frivolous divorce and remarriage. Then Luke inserts the bit about Lazarus and the rich man, a poignant illustration regarding what happens to people who don’t repent, how things aren’t as they seem (the last will, in fact, be first), how those who look good in this life might miss not only the banquet but receive not even a drop of water for their parched lips, and how few actually walk the narrow path. In that story the tormented rich man knew that his brothers weren’t far behind. Misery loves company except in hell, so he wanted Abraham to do something to help his brothers repent before it was too late. Abraham notes that the rich man’s brothers have the law and the prophets. What an indictment on the antagonists! The very law they were abusing, making it nearly impossible to find the kingdom under their poor management, contained the message that could have given them light for their maps. The rich man speaks for the religious elite when he says, “No, father Abraham . . . .” He knew right well that the heart of the law was being entirely ignored . The Torah that the Pharisees “seemed” to esteem, was not actually being obeyed; and ironically, they were always citing the law in opposition to Jesus. But then Jesus teaches something devastating. In His story captured by Luke in 16.30-31, He indicates that even a dead man rising will not convince the rich man’s brothers to repent.
And so it is today. Even in the shadow of the resurrection there is no shortage of God’s people who are taking their position as antagonists rather than protagonists. Projecting our own fears onto the image of God, we are suspicious of His grace. In response, many tighten the screws on religion, fleeing to the safety of sanctuaries, refusing to search for the lost, controlling the door to the kingdom, posturing, grumbling, and accusing all who disagree of being a threat to authentic Christianity. The Pharisees had boiled faithfulness down to a handful of externals which made it really easy to manage (poorly) God’s project. Maybe we’re actually pretty good disciples after all–not disciples of Christ, but of the antagonists of Jesus’ day. Don’t we tend to boil faithfulness down to a handful of externals so that we can manage God’s project, standing at the door, checking I.D.s in the form of worship style, denominational affiliation, peculiar twists on the “process of salvation,” versions of the Bible, and on and on?
I pray that we hear Jesus, that we read the gospels with prayer-filled trust and obedience. That’s O-B-E-D-I-E-N-C-E. O, did I forget to emphasize, OBEDIENCE? I heard Dallas Willard remark in a lecture, “Obedience is the organ of knowledge in the spiritual life.” The religious elite might set at the table today, flouting knowledge about subcategories of a convoluted interpretation of the law which keeps the poor, obedient Lazarus’s looking bad and eating crumbs. But, again, we learn from Jesus that things aren’t really always as they appear.
