Luke 16:1-18

New English Translation

Footnotes

1. Luke 16:1 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
2. Luke 16:1 tn These are not formal legal charges, but reports from friends, acquaintances, etc.; Grk “A certain man was rich who had a manager, and this one was reported to him as wasting his property.”
3. Luke 16:1 sn His manager was the steward in charge of managing the house. He could have been a slave trained for the role.
4. Luke 16:1 tn Or “squandering.” This verb is graphic; it means to scatter (L&N 57.151).
5. Luke 16:2 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the result of the reports the man received about his manager.
6. Luke 16:2 tn Grk “him”; the referent (the manager) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
7. Luke 16:2 sn Although phrased as a question, the charges were believed by the owner, as his dismissal of the manager implies.
8. Luke 16:2 tn Or “stewardship”; the Greek word οἰκονομία (oikonomia) is cognate with the noun for the manager (οἰκονόμος, oikonomos).
9. Luke 16:3 tn Here δέ (de) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events in the parable.
10. Luke 16:3 tn Grk “the stewardship,” “the management.”
11. Luke 16:3 tn Here “dig” could refer (1) to excavation (“dig ditches,” L&N 19.55) or (2) to agricultural labor (“work the soil,” L&N 43.3). In either case this was labor performed by the uneducated, so it would be an insult as a job for a manager.
12. Luke 16:3 tn Grk “I do not have strength to dig; I am ashamed to beg.”sn To beg would represent a real lowering of status for the manager, because many of those whom he had formerly collected debts from, he would now be forced to beg from.
13. Luke 16:4 tn This is a dramatic use of the aorist and the verse is left unconnected to the previous verse by asyndeton, giving the impression of a sudden realization.
14. Luke 16:4 sn Thinking ahead, the manager develops a plan to make people think kindly of him (welcome me into their homes).
15. Luke 16:5 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the result of the manager’s decision.
16. Luke 16:5 tn Grk “summoning.” The participle προσκαλεσάμενος (proskalesamenos) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.
17. Luke 16:6 tn Grk “He”; the referent (the first debtor) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
18. Luke 16:6 sn A measure (sometimes translated “bath”) was just over 8 gallons (about 30 liters). This is a large debt—about 875 gallons (3000 liters) of olive oil, worth 1000 denarii, over three year’s pay for a daily worker.
19. Luke 16:6 tn Grk “He”; the referent (the manager) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here δέ (de) has not been translated for stylistic reasons.
20. Luke 16:6 sn The bill was halved (sit down quickly, and write fifty). What was the steward doing? This is debated. 1) Did he simply lower the price? 2) Did he remove interest from the debt? 3) Did he remove his own commission? It is hard to be sure. Either of the latter two options is more likely. The goal was clear: The manager would be seen in a favorable light for bringing a deflationary trend to prices.
21. Luke 16:7 tn Grk “He”; the referent (the second debtor) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here δέ (de) has not been translated for stylistic reasons.
22. Luke 16:7 sn The 100 measures here was 100 cors. A cor was a Hebrew dry measure for grain, flour, etc., of between 10-12 bushels (about 390 liters). This was a huge amount of wheat, representing the yield of about 100 acres, a debt of between 2500-3000 denarii.
23. Luke 16:7 tn Grk “He”; the referent (the manager) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
24. Luke 16:7 sn The percentage of reduction may not be as great because of the change in material.
25. Luke 16:8 tn Grk “And the.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.
26. Luke 16:8 sn Is the manager dishonest because of what he just did? Or is it a reference to what he had done earlier, described in v. 1? This is a difficult question, but it seems unlikely that the master, having fired the man for prior dishonesty, would now commend those same actions. It would also be unusual for Jesus to make that point of the story the example. Thus it is more likely the reference to dishonesty goes back to the earliest events, while the commendation is for the cleverness of the former manager reflected in vv. 5-7.
27. Luke 16:8 sn Where this parable ends is debated: Does it conclude with v. 7, after v. 8a, after v. 8b, or after v. 9? Verse 8a looks as if it is still part of the story, with its clear reference to the manager, while 8b looks like Jesus’ application, since its remarks are more general. So it is most likely the parable stops after v. 8a.
28. Luke 16:8 tn Grk “sons” (an idiom).
29. Luke 16:8 tn Grk “with their own generation.”
30. Luke 16:8 tn Grk “sons.” Here the phrase “sons of light” is a reference to the righteous. The point is that those of the world often think ahead about consequences better than the righteous do.
31. Luke 16:9 tn Grk “unrighteous mammon.” Mammon is the Aramaic term for wealth or possessions. The point is not that money is inherently evil, but that it is often misused so that it is a means of evil; see 1 Tim 6:6-10, 17-19. The call is to be generous and kind in its use. Zacchaeus becomes the example of this in Luke’s Gospel (19:1-10).
32. Luke 16:9 tn Grk “they may welcome you.”
33. Luke 16:9 tn Grk “eternal tents” (as dwelling places).
34. Luke 16:10 sn The point of the statement faithful in a very little is that character is shown in how little things are treated.
35. Luke 16:11 tn Or “faithful.”
36. Luke 16:11 tn Grk “the unrighteous mammon.” See the note on the phrase “worldly wealth” in v. 9.
37. Luke 16:11 sn Entrust you with the true riches is a reference to future service for God. The idea is like 1 Cor 9:11, except there the imagery is reversed.
38. Luke 16:12 tn Or “faithful.”
39. Luke 16:12 tn Grk “have not been faithful with what is another’s.”
40. Luke 16:12 tn Grk “what is your own.”
41. Luke 16:13 sn The contrast between hate and love here is rhetorical. The point is that one will choose the favorite if a choice has to be made.
42. Luke 16:13 tn Or “and treat [the other] with contempt.”
43. Luke 16:13 tn Grk “God and mammon.” This is the same word (μαμωνᾶς, mamōnas; often merely transliterated as “mammon”) translated “worldly wealth” in vv. 9, 11.sn The term money is used to translate mammon, the Aramaic term for wealth or possessions. The point is not that money is inherently evil, but that it is often misused so that it is a means of evil; see 1 Tim 6:6-10, 17-19. Here “money” is personified as a potential master and thus competes with God for the loyalty of the disciple. The passage is ultimately not a condemnation of wealth (there is no call here for absolute poverty) but a call for unqualified discipleship. God must be first, not money or possessions.
44. Luke 16:14 sn See the note on Pharisees in 5:17.
45. Luke 16:14 tn A figurative extension of the literal meaning “to turn one’s nose up at someone”; here “ridicule, sneer at, show contempt for” (L&N 33.409).
46. Luke 16:15 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.
47. Luke 16:15 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
48. Luke 16:15 tn Grk “before men.” The contrast is between outward appearance (“in people’s eyes”) and inward reality (“God knows your hearts”). Here the Greek term ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos) is used twice in a generic sense, referring to both men and women, but “men” has been retained in the text to provide a strong verbal contrast with “God” in the second half of the verse.
49. Luke 16:15 tn Or “exalted.” This refers to the pride that often comes with money and position.
50. Luke 16:15 tn Or “is an abomination,” “is abhorrent” (L&N 25.187).
51. Luke 16:16 tn There is no verb in the Greek text; one must be supplied. Some translations (NASB, NIV) supply “proclaimed” based on the parallelism with the proclamation of the kingdom. The transitional nature of this verse, however, seems to call for something more like “in effect” (NRSV) or, as used here, “in force.” Further, Greek generally can omit one of two kinds of verbs—either the equative verb or one that is already mentioned in the preceding context (ExSyn 39).
52. Luke 16:16 sn John refers to John the Baptist.
53. Luke 16:16 sn Until John; since then. This verse indicates a shift in era, from law to kingdom.
54. Luke 16:16 sn The kingdom of God is a major theme of Jesus’ teaching. The nature of the kingdom of God in the NT and in Jesus’ teaching has long been debated by interpreters and scholars, with discussion primarily centering around the nature of the kingdom (earthly, heavenly, or both) and the kingdom’s arrival (present, future, or both). An additional major issue concerns the relationship between the kingdom of God and the person and work of Jesus himself. See Luke 6:20; 11:20; 17:20-21.
55. Luke 16:16 tn Many translations have “entereth violently into it” (ASV) or “is forcing his way into it” (NASB, NIV). This is not true of everyone. It is better to read the verb βιάζεται here as passive rather than middle, and in a softened sense of “be urged.” See Gen 33:11; Judg 13:15-16; 19:7; 2 Sam 3:25, 27 in the LXX. This fits the context well because it agrees with Jesus’ attempt to persuade his opponents to respond morally. For further discussion and details, see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 2:1352-53. For a summary of the lexical options see BDAG 175 s.v. βιάζω. Differences in the context suggest a different meaning for the same term in Matt 11:12.
56. Luke 16:17 tn Or “one small part of a letter” (L&N 33.37).
57. Luke 16:17 tn Grk “to fall”; that is, “to drop out of the text.” Jesus’ point may be that the law is going to reach its goal without fail, in that the era of the promised kingdom comes.
58. Luke 16:18 sn The examples of marriage and divorce show that the ethical standards of the new era are still faithful to promises made in the presence of God. To contribute to the breakup of a marriage, which involved a vow before God, is to commit adultery. This works whether one gets a divorce or marries a person who is divorced, thus finalizing the breakup of the marriage. Jesus’ point concerns the need for fidelity and ethical integrity in the new era.