Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 180:720 (Oct 2023)
Article: The Unity Of The Shrewd Steward Pericope: Luke 16:1–13 Reconsidered
Author: Melvin L. Otey

BSac 180:720 (October-December 2023) p. 441

The Unity Of The Shrewd Steward Pericope: Luke 16:1–13 Reconsidered

Melvin L. Otey

Melvin L. Otey is a Professor of Law at Faulkner University’s Jones School of Law and a PhD student at Faulkner’s Kearley Graduate School of Theology.

Abstract

The parable of the shrewd steward (Luke 16:1–8a) is one of the most difficult stories in the New Testament. The challenges of understanding and applying the parable are exacerbated when scholars embrace the view that the sayings Luke attributed to Jesus in verses 8b-13 are wholly unrelated to the story. The arguments for doing so are not persuasive. Therefore, verses 1–13 should be read as one pericope, which circumscribes the universe of reasonable interpretations for the story.

The parable of the shrewd steward is unique to Luke’s Gospel, fascinating for its roguish main character and compelling for its call to decisive action and absolute commitment to God. However, the story is also notable for the wide range of interpretations and applications by commentators. The story “is one of the most intensely debated of all the Gospel parables.”1 One scholar reads it as an illustration of “the roguery of divine grace.”2 Another posits that the “policy of voluntary debt remission in Roman farm tenancy provides a plausible context in which to interpret the master’s praise.”3 Still another submits that it is a clandestine assault on the institution of slavery.4

BSac 180:720 (October-December 2023) p. 442

The breadth of readings is due, in part, to the consensus that Jesus’s sayings in verses 8b-13 are unrelated to the story and consequently should not inform its interpretation. Determining the parameters of a passage is a critical exegetical step. By discounting the relevance of the sayings and declining to read the shrewd steward pericope in its entirety, exegetes terminate their work prematurely and open the floodgates to imaginative expositions of the story that are not necessarily supported by the text or the larger Lukan context. Thus, it is important to carefully (re)consider the initial decision readers make when analyzing this fascinating parable.

While the course of discussion may not change radically in the short term, and while some questions about the passage ...