Easter 1

Distinctly Lukan:
The Steward and the Widow

Josh Easter
Dr. R. Reeves
BIB-4023
Southwest Baptist University
April 17, 2013
 Easter 2

The Unrighteous Steward (Luke 16:1-13)

The first thirteen verses of the sixteenth chapter in Luke hold what has been deemed the

parable of the unrighteous steward. This parable is uniquely Lukan, so it deserves careful

consideration as to why this is. The challenge, then, is to observe Luke’s theological agenda in

order to make best sense of this parable. To make sense of this parable, the exegete must

consider its context. Charles H. Talbert sees the entire chapter 16 as paralleled by or forming a

chiasmus with Luke 12:1-48. The latter passage contains three themes: the threat of hell (vv.1-

12), riches (vv. 13-34), and stewardship (vv. 35-48), and the former has the same three only in

reverse order.1 Joel B. Green sees chapter 15, especially 15:11-32, and chapter 16 as being

closely related.2 But Green also sees another connection in the theme of hospitality among 14:1-

24, 15:1-23, and 16. The theme consists of using wealth to step over social boundaries between

rich and poor.3 Still others see chapter 16 as being its own literary unit, and the context for the

parable need not be sought beyond this. Chapter 16 begins and ends with a parable, each of

which begins with the phrase “There was a rich man.”4 However, the present writer holds that it

is too narrow a scope to limit the context to just this chapter. Other scholars show that

instruction as to how one should handle his wealth has been a recurring theme since 11:39-41.

Here Jesus challenged the Pharisees to give as charity and renounce their greed. The parable of

the rich man is found in 12:13-21; the parable of the prudent steward is located in 12:42-48; and

then warnings are given all throughout chapter 12 as to how to prepare for the final accounting.
1
Bernard Brandon Scott, Hear Then the Parable: A Commentary on the Parables of Jesus (Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1989), 128.
2
Joel B. Green, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke (Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), 587-588.
3
Ibid., 589.
4
Leander E. Keck, The New Interpreter’s Bible: Luke—John. Vol. IX. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995),
306.
 Easter 3

There is a high cost of discipleship portrayed in this section of scriptural unity, for as Jesus said,

“None of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions” (14:33).

Chapter fifteen finds its tie with the passage at hand in similar vocabulary usage in the parable of

the prodigal son (15:11-32). Specifically, the son in 15:13 is said to have “squandered his

property” and 16:1 tells of the unrighteous steward who has “squandered his possessions.”5

Then the parable of the unrighteous steward occurs and is followed by the parable of the rich

man and Lazarus. This whole section is seen as a unit by some, and this broader view is the one

that the present writer subscribes to as well.6 The whole book of Luke is filled with a theme

surrounding wealth, stretching as far back as the song of Mary (1:46-56). In the Third Gospel,

Jesus came to reverse the status of who is rich and who is poor. Therefore, Luke 16:1-13 finds

its context in the greater unity of the book of Luke based on the theme of wealth and how it

ought to be used.

Beside the proper context through which the parable is to be read, also up for debate is

the perimeters of the parable itself. “It is clear that the story itself extends to 16:7. The problem

is to know if 16:8 belongs to the story per se, forming its conclusion, or if it is a comment made

by the parable narrator.”7 Beyond this, though, how does verse 9 and verses 10-13 fit in? There

are four main views as to where the parable ends. The first view is that verses 1-9 make up the

parable with verses 1-7 being the actual parable and 8-9 being its application. The master in

verse 8a is Jesus. This is very much a minority view today, but it is still found among some.

Secondly, others advocate verses 1-7 making up the parable, and everything was redacted.
5
John Nolland, “Speedy Vindication for any who have Faith” in Word Biblical Commentary: Volume 35B,
Luke 9:21-18:34 (Dallas: Word Books, 1993), 796-797.
6
Keck, 306.
7
Fabian E. Udoh, “The Tale of an Unrighteous Slave (Luke 16:1-8 [13])” in Journal of Biblical Literature
128, no. 2 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, Summer 2009), 314.
 Easter 4

Third, perhaps verses 1-8a make up the parable with the master still being debated. Finally,

verses 1-8a make up the parable, and the master in 8a is the rich man of verses 1, 3, and 5.8 In

either of these views, verses 10-12 is merely a “collection of sayings drawn together both by

their relevance to the parable and by catchword linkage,” and thirteen has its own unity.9 The

present writer, however, considers the parable to include 16:1-13, with vv. 1-8 being the parable

itself and vv. 9-13 being its explanation and application.

In the parable, the rich man introduced in verse one is probably a rich land owner that

rents out his estate in exchange for oil and wheat.10 Often times these wealthy men would have

managers, free or enslaved, to help run their businesses. This is the context of the unrighteous

steward, who, based on the lack of severity in punishment, is probably a free man (cf. 12:46-48).

The steward’s punishment was loss of his position due to squandering his master’s possessions

(vv. 1-2). This, however, does not necessarily mean that he was guilty of fraud or embezzlement,

seeing as he was not prosecuted. It could just be that the manager mismanaged his master’s

possessions in some weaker sense, beckoning a management account to be submitted (v. 2).11

After losing his job, the steward has to devise a plan that would allow him to be supported. He

was not physically able to dig and did not want to shame himself by begging (v. 3).12 Instead, the

manager decided to turn his master’s debtors into his own. Posing to be still employed by his
8
Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Anchor Bible: The Gospel According to Luke X-XXIV (New York: Doubleday,
1985), 1096-1097. See also Green, 589. Green says that v. 9 is a parallel of v. 4, and its relevance must be realized
as part of the parable. Verses 10-13, according to Green, are also connected via common vocabulary, but they are
not as integral to the parable as v. 9 is.
9
Keck, 309.
10
Ibid., 307.
11
William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Luke (Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978), 768.
12
Manual labor and begging were considered the social step directly above slavery on the status ladder
(Nolland, 798).
 Easter 5

master so as to be more credible and trusted (notice that when he asks the debtors how much they

owe, he says how much do you owe “my master,” as if he hasn’t been fired), the manager binds

the debtors by honor to reciprocate a gift.13 More precisely, the steward reduced the debt that

was owed to his former master and thereby entered an honor-bound “contract” with the debtors

that would cause them to provide for him. Even more, the steward placed the master’s honor at

stake as well. If the manager were to openly punish the steward now, after the latter has already

gained public favor from the master’s debtors, the master would be seen as acting malevolently

in response to the steward benevolence. By claiming that the rich man was still his master, this

slashing of debts also looks like a benevolent action not only on the part of the steward but of the

master as well.14 Complication arises when the reader sees that “his master praised the

unrighteous manager because he had acted shrewdly” (v. 8a). Two major questions come out of

this statement.

The first question sprouting from v. 8a pertains to why the unrighteous manager was

praised. Did he act honestly or dishonestly? There are four major options here: (1) the steward

cheated his master by reducing the size of the debts; (2) the steward acted righteously by

removing the illegal interest fee charged by the manager; (3) the manager acted righteously by

reducing the amount of commissioned owed him, which was already included in the debt total;15

or (4) the master honestly reduced the debt due to hard times and natural disaster (e.g. drought).16

The first proposition is the simplest and is rather self-explanatory. He cheated his master of

13
Gift-giving in antiquity was necessarily reciprocal as determined by the honor system. It was shameful if
one did not reciprocate a gift upon receiving such.
14
Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 1993), 234.
15
Keck, 308.
16
Keener, 234.
 Easter 6

money, perhaps out of spite for losing his job. Option two requires a bit more to be said, though.

According to Old Testament Law (Exod. 22:25; Lev. 25:36-37; Deut. 23:19-20), it was illegal for

interest to be charged from one Jew to another if the debtor was poor. However, people would

get around these laws by charging heavy interest on fellow Jews that were rich (and clearly the

debtors in this story were wealthy, possibly even business associates, as based on the amount that

they owed).17 The steward, then, acted righteously by relieving the debtors of this unfair

interested added onto their bill.18 However, this second option has difficulties. First, if this were

interest loan, it should be noted that interest rates were seen as high when they were over 50%,

which was considered a typical rate. But “the reduction in the olive oil debt is more than could

reasonably be treated as surcharge (interest? insurance? costs?) on a loan of half the specified

amount. … When we come to the wheat, the problem is the same in the other direction: the

reduction is only 25 percent, where the normal interest would be 50 percent. The reductions do

not represent, therefore, a reduction to the original capital amount of a loan.”19 The third option

finds weakness in the fact that the money was specifically said as owed to the master, not the

steward. Finally, the fourth proposition finds little supporting evidence in records of disaster.

When we look at the motives of the steward as described in vv. 3-4, his intentions seem

to be very self-centered. He wants to lower the debts to gain the favor and honor of his master’s

clients in order that he might be taken care of. He has a history of squandering his master’s

possessions, and this is him carrying on that tendency. Moreover, the manager is not called

dishonest or unrighteous until after he cancelled the debts.20 All of the other options mentioned

17
Nolland, 799.
18
Hendriksen, 771.
19
Nolland, 799.
20
Robert H. Stein, The New American Commentary: Luke (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 412.
 Easter 7

involve him being considered righteous by these actions. Using Ockham’s Razor, the first

proposition most strongly demands subscription because the others require additional

information not given in the parable.21 Still, despite being labeled unrighteous, the steward

accomplished his purpose by necessarily gaining favor in the eyes of the debtors.

But if the manager is to be considered dishonest, then a second question needs to be

raised. Who is the master (ὁ κύριος) in v. 8a and why is he giving the unrighteous the steward

praise? Scholars agree that it is either the master of vv. 1, 3, and 5 or it is the Lord. Support for

ὁ κύριος being Jesus is found in two ways: (1) 8b simply cannot be the earthly master’s words,

they are surely Jesus’22; (2) it is unlikely that a master would praise someone that has cheated

him out of money.23 But, if one holds that κύριος here is a reference to Jesus, then the parable

has an abrupt ending in verse 7; 8a makes for a better conclusion to the parable than 8b.24 That is

not to mention either that v. 9 seems to be a perfect transition in that clearly it is the Lord that

says “And I tell you.”25 Furthermore, the word κύριος also appears in v. 3 (once) and v. 5

(twice), each time referring to the rich man. There is, therefore, no reason to assume that the

representative of the word would suddenly change.26

21
Keck, 308.
22
“For the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light,”
(cf. 1QS 1, 9; 2, 16; 3, 13; cf. also Ephesians 5:8). Danker, 173.
23
This second idea has led to some theories of misinterpretation of “praise” as should have been “cursed.”
But this is purely built on speculation. Others have said that the praising of the earthy master cheating steward is
heavy irony, but this leads to an unlikely interpretation of vv. 9-13.
24
Notice the unexpected twist for an ending as a correlation to proceeding parable, the prodigal son (Keck,
308-309).
25
“This expression is found over thirty times in Luke and can introduce seams that tie accounts together or
conclusions to accounts (11:9; 13:24; 15:7, 10). It can, however, also be found within accounts as well (3:8; 7:9, 26,
28).” (Stein, 416)
26
Hendriksen, 770. While ὁ κύριος is used to reference a figure outside of a parable twice in other Lukan
parables (of Jesus in 12:42 and 18:6), it more often is used of in within the parable (cf. 12:37; 12:42b; 14:23)
 Easter 8

Based on the fact that claiming κύριος means Jesus creates a very abrupt ending to the

parable, the present writer holds that the master in 8a is indeed the earthly master. But why

would he praise someone that has cheated him? It is well explained in athletic talk: “The master

certainly does not commend the manager’s earlier dishonesty, but, like a defeated athlete

commenting wryly on his opponent’s skill and strategy, he feels compelled to acknowledge the

man’s success.”27 The manager is not being praised for his dishonesty; rather he is being praised

for his cleverness (his shrewdness) and his thinking ahead for his future.28 This is supported by

the fact that there were ancient stories that portrayed powerful people appreciating the cunning,

even if the cunning act was against them. These stories were often portrayed as slaves outwitting

their masters.29 This is where we find Luke’s lesson beginning to form.

Luke has no problem telling us to be shrewd,30 but not in the same way that this manager

was, i.e., instead of being dishonest squanderers, we are to be wise stewards of our possessions

seizing opportunity that exists in the midst of threat (16:9-13).31 Indeed, if we use the property of

others for our own interests,32 we jeopardize our attainment of our own gifts in glory; but
(Nolland, 800).
27
Gary Inrig, The Parables: Understanding What Jesus Meant (Grand Rapids: Discovery House
Publishers, 1991), 112.
28
Hendriksen, 770-771. “Jesus in several other places drew lessons from the actions of less than noble
characters. In the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Matt 25:1-13), the wise virgins are in fact quite selfish
(25:9). Compare also the behavior of the man who found treasure in his field (13:44) and how God can be likened
to an unjust judge (Luke 18:1-8)” (Stein, 412).
29
Keener, 234-235.
30
As a matter of fact, Jesus instructs us to be shrewd (φρόνιμος) elsewhere (Matt. 10:16). Furthermore,
stories of clever, wise, and deceitful people are found all throughout Jewish folklore. Looking at Genesis, one sees
that Jacob was the great deceiver, and his relatives were like him (Keck, 310).
31
Stein, 412.
32
Hence the Aramaic word “mammon” being termed unrighteous. It can be used as an instrument of
injustice (Mark 12:40), but disciples of Jesus are to use it for justice (See Frederick W. Danker, Jesus and the New
Age [St. Louis: Clayton Publishing House, 1971], 174). Indeed mammon has immense power; and it cannot be
 Easter 9

shrewdness can achieve eternal goals (v. 12).33 “Shrewd people, then, use money in light of

eternal consequences.”34 Thus, “the point of the story is prudence.”35 Like the shrewd manager,

hearers of Luke will understand that they too are in the midst of a crisis. Whereas for the

manager refuge was in the honor bound gift of the debtors, our refuge is in Christ and the coming

of His kingdom.36 Verse 13, though, makes known the power of wealth that conflicts with

devout service to God.37 It is clear that Luke’s theological agenda of exposing and attacking the

power of wealth, as is doused in his Gospel, is showing up again here in 16:1-13. Indeed, Luke

would agree with Paul that the “love of money is the root of all sorts of evil” (1 Tim. 6:10), and it

stands as a stumbling block between man and God. Blessed are the poor, and blessed are those

that use their mammon to aid the poor.

taken neutrally. If it is not placed under the authority of Jesus, it becomes a rival evil god (Inrig, 114). According to
Luke, the rule of wealth is seen in theft, hoarding, exploitation, conscious consumption, and disregard for the needy
(cf. 11:39; 12:16-21; 14:12-14; 16:19-31). See Green, 596-597. “Either God owns our wealth or it owns us” (Ibid.,
118). If we are not faithful in using our wealth well, God will not trust us with true riches (v. 11). We are called to
recognize the limitations of earthly wealth (vv. 11-12; cf. 1 Tim. 6:7). Thus, because we own nothing on earth but
serve as God’s managers, Christians are to use possessions to serve others, especially the lowly (Keener, 235). This
is what is meant by making friends with the poor in Luke 18:9 (cf. 12:33; 18:22). If we use God’s mammon wisely
on earth, through the lens of eternity, we convert the currency of earthly wealth into heavenly riches of our own (cf.
Luke 12:33-34). See Nolland, 806-808. Just like the manager in the Lukan parable, an accounting is going to be
given to God on the last day. Acting shrewdly with a future priority will best prepare us for that day (Stein, 414).
33
Danker, 174.
34
Inrig, 117
35
Danker, 173.
36
Keck, 310.
37
A near exact parallelism (27 of 28 words match) is found in Matthew 6:24 (Stein, 417). It might find
roots in Exodus 21:5, where full service requires exclusive love. See also Gospel of Thomas 47, which says “It is
impossible for a man to ride two horses [and] to stretch two bows” (Ibid., 417). This verse says that one cannot
serve both God and wealth. Ancient Greco-Roman reports show that some slaves did have more than one master,
but these reports often consisted of complaints that the slave was not satisfying the owner’s demands. Jesus’ point
here is that a slave’s service, if multi-faceted (if indeed possible), will be much less satisfying to one side or the
other. (Nolland, 807). With a stricter interpretation, “these two masters demand such diametrically opposed forms of
service, since each grounds its demands in such antithetical worldviews, one cannot serve them both” (Green, 597).
 Easter 10

The Persistent Widow (Luke 18:1-8)

In the first eight verses of Luke 18 one will find Jesus’ parable of the persistent widow. 38

Like the parable of the unrighteous steward (16:1-13), this parable is unique to Luke among the

canonical Gospels. Luke must have a theological purpose for inserting it in his Gospel. But

first, the parable finds its literary context in the preceding chapter, especially verses 20-27.

These particular verses concern the return of the Son of Man (18:8). Luke 17:20-18:8 make up a

tightly cohesive literary unit.39 In 17:22-37, Jesus described the coming of the Lord and its

element of surprise. Christ followers will be persecuted and seek deliverance, but will not find

it. They, therefore, will be prone to losing heart and abandoning the faith. Moreover, not only

will they suffer, but the Son of Man must also suffer and be rejected by his generation (17:25).

But in 18:1-8 Jesus offers a word of encouragement as to how the disciples can endure until the

assured vindication comes, despite the delay.40 Luke lays out the meaning of the parable very

clearly in 18:1 – “to show that at all times they ought to pray and not to lose heart.” And why

must they not lose heart? Verse eight forms an inclusio with the first verse in providing the

38
Others label this parable “The Unjust Judge,” but the present writer finds that this title focuses on a
secondary point and asides the major focus. The widow is to be understood as the main character over against the
judge. While the significance of both characters is immense, and an important lesson is drawn from each, the one
that Luke focuses on most (as seen in 18:1) is that of the widow.
39
Keck, 335. Hendriksen finds a further context in that 17:5-19 include Jesus showing his disciples what
genuine faith looks like, one prompted by gratitude and love. Faith and prayer cannot be separated. See
Hendriksen, 541. Danker sees the context as being limited to 17:22-37 due to the fact that Jesus is clearly speaking
to the disciples in both 18:1-8 and 17:22-37. See Danker, 183. But looking at the wider context, Jesus’ parable was
indeed sparked by the question raised by the Pharisees in 17:20-21. He tried explaining to the Pharisees that He was
the Son of Man in their midst, but they did not understand; thus Jesus turned to his disciples to clarify in 7:22ff. See
Inrig, 150-151. Some have suggested that the literary unit is actually 18:1-8 and 18:9-14 make up a literary
grouping due to the prayer language present in both, but vv 9 through 14 fit better with what follows them.
Furthermore, 18:1-8 carries on the disciple audience started in 17:22, but the audience will be broadened in 18:9
(See Nolland, 866-867).
40
Green, 637.
 Easter 11

answer: He will bring about justice for them quickly. Verse eight also forms an inclusio with

17:22 with the mention of the coming of the Son of Man.41

Apart from the obvious context building up to Luke 18:1-8, one will also find a nice

meshing in structure and theme in following the parable. The parable of the Pharisee and the tax

collector in Luke 18:9-14 ties in well with the parable of the persistent widow in that both

concern prayer and plays on a contrast of two characters in distinctly different positions.

Whereas in 18:1-8 the difference in character concerned social status and power, verses 9-14

show contrasts in honor and status.42 Luke 16:1-13 also finds a slight comparison in that both

feature less-than-noble characters used as illustrations.43 While these two passages find hints of

parallelism with the passage at hand, in both structure and theme 18:1-8 finds a stark parallel

with the parable of the neighbor in need (11:5-8). Both of the parables star a persistent character

in need, and both have a Qal Wahomer, or a fortiori, argument, in which reason is called from

lesser to greater.44 It is also worth mentioning the parallel found in Sirach 35:12-24.45 Even if

this is a passage originated not by Luke, it is clear that it fits well within his purpose at this point

in his Gospel.

The parable itself can be divided into two sections: the actual parable (vv. 2-5) and the

lesson (vv. 1, 6-8). In this parable, Jesus speaks of a judge that “did not fear God and did not

41
Stein, 444.
42
Keck, 335.
43
Stein, 444.
44
Keck, 336.
45
If this is so, this could be used as support by those that argue this parable is not genuinely Lukan. As a
matter of fact, much of the verses in this parable are often seen as borrowed by Luke. The introductory verse one is
an exception as it is widely agreed that it is authentic due to its language ἔλεγεν δὲ παραβολὴν αὐτοι̑ς (cf. Luke 5:36;
6:39; 15:3; 21:29; 12:16; 13:6; 18:9; Acts 26:9). See Nolland 865-866.
 Easter 12

respect man.” The judge is the epitome of power in the day with little fear of opposition, and he

showed it by not fearing God and not caring about people. Therefore, he “cannot be reached on

the grounds of either conscience or compassion.”46 However, to provide justice for the oppressed

was a major charge of the judges in the Old Testament because God cared for the poor.47 Among

these oppressed, widows stood as the clear benchmark. (see e.g. Ruth 1:21; Job 22:9). Poverty

and indebtedness were all too common among widows.48 Judges often had to deal with disputes

involving widows and orphans as they were easy targets to be taken advantage of. The widow,

as completely powerless, must rely on the powerful judge for vindication from opponent. It is

unsure what threat this opponent of the widow poses, but it could be that he is threatening to take

the widow’s land or children if she does not pay her debt.49 Regardless, the widow was anxious

for something and the only weapon that she possessed was persistence. It is apparent from the

parable that she continually came before the judge with the same request for protection. For fear

of allowing the widow to wearing him out50, the judge gives in to the requests of the widow and

provides legal protection for her (v.5). Through perseverance, the widow has attained what she

wanted.

As mentioned above, this parable of Jesus is unique to Luke and therefore must have a

theological purpose. If one is to take Luke on his own terms, it is important to tie this parable

46
Inrig, 154.
47
See Ex. 22:21-24; Deut. 1:16-17; 10:18-19; 24:17-18; Job 29:21; Ps. 146:9; Prov. 15:25; Is. 1:17, 23;
10:1-2; cf. Ps. 68:5; Jer. 5:28-29; 6:6-7
48
See Ruth 1:21; 2 Kings 4:1-7; Job 22:9; 24:4; Lam. 1:1
49
Keener, 238. See 2 Kings 4:1-7.
50
Literally ὑπωπιάζη̯ με, “to strike under the eye.” In weaker senses, it can mean “to darken the face,” “to
annoy greatly,” or “to wear out.” This phrase is only found at this point in the Bible. See Geoffrey W. Bromiely,
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: Abridged in One Volume (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1985), 1239.
 Easter 13

into the overall message of Jesus as described in Luke. Two major themes are to be found, one

for each major character in the parable. First, it should be mentioned that Luke wants his readers

to be able contrast the unjust judge with the merciful God. Whereas the unrighteous judge in the

parable brought justice afterward (v.4), God will bring justice quickly (v. 8). Moreover, the

judge acted out of self-interest – he wanted the widow to stop nagging him. God however, is the

opposite of the judge according to Jesus. The Father does not get annoyed with his subjects

coming unto him.51 In fact, He wants them to come “day and night” (v. 7). This is where the

reader finds a Qal Wahomer in this passage – if even the unrighteous judge will provide justice

for a lowly widow, how much more will the righteous God provide justice for his elect?52 Those

that love God need not worry; or in the words of verse one, they need not “lose heart.” And how

might they keep from losing heart? This is where we turn to the widow for the second lesson to

be drawn from the parable.

Luke is a very subversive Gospel where the rich are cursed and the poor are blessed,

where the proud are humbled and the lowly are comforted. Widows, therefore, are used as

examples all throughout Luke-Acts.53 What the widow in this particular parable teaches is the

power of persistence. Her persistence specifically entailed coming before the judge, much more

powerful than she, seeking justice and protection. She had nothing compared to the judge.

Likewise, God’s elect are to persistently come to the Judge in prayer seeking justice and

protection until the parousia. Going back to the context of chapter 17, the parable shows how

disciples of Christ are to keep hope even in the face of persecution. Chapter 17 shows how the

times will be tough, riddled with difficulty and strife, but the remedy is faithful and persistent
51
Inrig, 155.
52
This idea that God is faithful to his people was a very common in Jewish thought. Keener, 238-239.
53
Luke 2:37; 4:25-26; 7:12; 20:47; 21:2-3; cf. Acts 6:1; 9:39-41. See Fitzmyer, 1179.
 Easter 14

prayer.54 This prayer is to be continual (notice not continuous)55, and based on the context, one

of “Your Kingdom come” (11:2; cf. 21:36).56 Still, “if we do not pray, we will grow weary and

‘fall into temptation’ (Luke 22:40).”57 Thus, Jesus’ question in verse eight—when the Son of

Man comes, will He find faith on the earth—will be answered affirmatively if persistent prayer is

continued in faith, bearing fruit (8:15).58 The challenge to the reader is to not be one that places

in question the finding of faith at the return of the Son of Man. But it is important to see that the

question raised here by Jesus is not out of speculation; there will surely be faith on earth when

the Son of Man returns (Matt. 24:44-46; Luke 12:37; 17:34-35; 1 Thess. 4:13-18). Rather, this is

a call of self-examination, i.e., will there be faith like that of the widow’s found on earth?59

The lesson brought up here is two-facetted: “the emphasis may fall either on the

importance of praying persistently, earnestly, and without losing heart—the point with which

Luke introduces the parable (18:1)—or on the assurance that God will answer those who pray

day and night.”60 The former is the lesson to be discovered in the widow and the latter is found

in the character of the judge. But it also should not be ignored that there is a theme of care for

the widows running through the pages of the Third Gospel. From the earliest history of Judeo-

54
See 1 Thess. 5:17; Rom. 12:12
55
In other words, we find a synecdoche in verse one, where “always” means “at all times,” “on all
occasions,” or “at every opportunity.” See E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible: Explained and
Illustrated (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1898), 619.
56
Stein, 444.
57
Inrig, 153. “Many Jewish writers predicted great sufferings in the end time, on account of which many
people would fall away from the truth; Jesus warns his own to persevere (21:8-19, 34-36; 22:31-32, 40, 46),”
(Keener, 239).
58
Stein, 447.
59
Hendriksen, 818.
60
Keck, 338.
 Easter 15

Christian tradition, no expression of faithfulness to God finds deeper roots than that of caring for

and loving on widows, strangers, and orphans.61 As alluded to earlier, this is a major theme all

throughout Luke. Furthermore, prayer is a major theme in Luke as well. Jesus’ practices and

teachings on prayer are heavily implanted in this Gospel. “It is not surprising, therefore, that

Luke interprets this parable as a call to persistent prayer.”62 There is much to be said about this,

61
Ibid., 339.
62
Keck, 337. For occurrences of Jesus praying in Luke, see 3:21; 5:16; 6:12; 9:18, 28-29; 22:39-45; 23:34,
46. For Jesus’ teaching on prayer in Luke, see 6:28; 11:1-13; 18:9-14; 19:46; 20:47; 22:40, 46.

BIBLIORGRAPHY

Bromiley, Geoffrey W. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: Abridged in One Volume.
Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1985.

Bullinger, E.W. Figures of Speech Used in the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1898.

Danker, Frederick W. Jesus and the New Age. St. Louis: Clayton Publishing House, 1972.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Anchor Bible: The Gospel According to Luke X-XXIV. New York:
Doubleday, 1985.

Green, Joel B. The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke.
Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997.
 Easter 16

but, as mentioned earlier, that would stretch the beyond purposes of this paper. Let it suffice to

say that a major theme of divine reversal for Luke, as proclaimed by Jesus, is seen here in

18:1-8.

Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Luke.
Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978.

Inrig, Gary. The Parables: Understanding What Jesus Meant. Grand Rapids: Discovery House
Publishers, 1991.

Keck, Leander E. The New Interpreter’s Bible: Luke – John. Vol. IX. Nashville: Abingdon Press,
1995.

Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Nolland, John. “Speedy Vindication for any who have Faith” in Word Biblical Commentary:
Volume 35B, Luke 9:21-18:34. Dallas: Word Books, 1993.

Scott, Bernard Brandon. Hear Then the Parable: A Commentary on the Parables of Jesus.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989.

Stein, Robert H. The New American Commentary: Luke. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992.

Udoh, Fabian E. “The Tale of an Unrighteous Slave (Luke 16:1-8 [13])” in Journal of Biblical
Literature 128, no. 2 (Summer 2009): 311-335. Academic Search Premier,
EBSCOhost (accessed April 1, 2013).
Easter 17