Facing, digesting and metabolising the feeling of shame for having done wrong. A deep dive into the Parable of the Unrighteous Steward.

This post is about a person feeling shame that is rightly due because that person has done wrong. When a person’s deeds have been evil, when the person has only been caring for their own interests and not caring how their conduct affects others, that person needs to face and feel their own shame. It is healthy for that person to face, experience, digest and metabolise his shame, with genuine humility and repentance.

A sinner who is being drawn by God, and is apprehending God’s mercy offered in Christ, is being called to turn from wicked conduct to right conduct. Responding rightly to that call will entail the sinner honestly facing, digesting and metabolising his feeling of shame for having done wrong.

Note: This post is not about the feeling of shame we have when other people falsely accuse us of doing wrong. If you are unsure whether you are being falsely accused and wrongly shamed by others — if you are unsure whether you are being blamed for things that others have done wrong — then I suggest you dig into these links. Each link opens in a new tab.

• What is abuse? How can I identify an abuser? How can I tell if I’m the abuser?
• Hand the shame back to the abuser
• The process the victim goes through in shedding false guilt
• False guilt — This takes you to many posts which give examples of false guilt, using our Tag “False guilt”.

Befriending a very uncomfortable truth

When a sinner accepts that his deeds have violated law and justice and he feels truly guilty for being unrighteous in heart and life, he is “befriending” a very uncomfortable truth about himself. He is befriending the grave reality of his sin — a reality he had been previously evading and denying. His “befriending'” that fact is essential in him changing his mind and course of conduct, and turning from sin to righteousness.

I will illustrate this by discussing what Jesus teaches after narrating the Parable of the Unrighteous Steward. I will propose that in Luke 16:9 — make friends for yourselves with the wicked mammon, so that when you depart this world, they may receive you into everlasting habitations — Jesus’ words could be pointing to this phenomenon of a person befriending the uncomfortable truth that his wrong living makes him shame-worthy. I’m open to challenges to my interpretation, so long as you carefully articulate your reasoning. 😊

For those who don’t know, “mammon” means worldly wealth, as distinct from the eternal riches which genuinely regenerate and faithful Christians will inherit in Christ.

The Parable of the Unrighteous Steward

Luke 16:1-13 (New Matthew Bible)

Note: Jesus gives the parable in Luke 16:1-8a. I have put a paragraph break after 8a, because I think the section from 8b-13 is Jesus’ moral application of the parable.

¹ And he said also to his disciples, There was a certain rich man who had a steward that was accused of wasting his goods. ² And he summoned him and said to him, How is it that I hear this of you? Give accounts of your stewardship, for you may no longer be steward.

³ The steward said within himself, What can I do? For my master will take away from me the stewardship. I cannot dig, and to beg I am ashamed. ⁴ I know what to do, so that when I am put out of the stewardship, people may receive me into their houses.

⁵ Then he called all his master’s debtors, and said to the first, How much do you owe to my master? ⁶ And he said, A hundred tons of oil. And the steward said to him, Take your bill, and sit down quickly and write fifty. ⁷ Then he said to another, What do you owe? And he said, A hundred quarters of wheat. The steward said to him, Take your bill and write eighty. ^8a And the lord [the master] commended the unjust steward because he had done wisely.

^8b For among their own, the children of this world are wiser than the children of light. ⁹ And I say also to you, make friends for yourselves with the wicked mammon, so that when you depart this world, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

¹⁰ He who is faithful in that which is least, the same is faithful in much. And he who is unfaithful in the least is unfaithful also in much. ¹¹ So then, if you have not been faithful in the wicked mammon, who will believe you in that which is true? ¹² And if you have not been faithful in another man’s business, who will give you your own?

¹³ No servant can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will lean to the one and neglect the other. You cannot serve both God and mammon.

The master was sacking the steward for apparent mismanagement of the master’s assets — he accused the steward of malfeasance. Malfeasance is the performance of an act that is legally unjustified, harmful, or contrary to law, especially by a public official or a person in a position of public trust.

In verse 8b, Jesus begins His application of the parable: For among their own, the children of this world are wiser than the children of light. This part is fairly easy to understand. Jesus is contrasting the steward’s forethought in providing for his body in this temporal world, with His disciples’ lack of forethought about where they might dwell in eternity.

A few points of importance:

• Jesus does not teach that we should emulate the steward’s unrighteous conduct.
• Jesus does not commend the steward for cheating the master, or for causing or allowing loss or damage to the master’s estate, or for failing to manage the master’s business so it made a decent profit.
• Jesus does not commend the steward for coercing or cheating the master’s debtors.
• Jesus does not commend the steward for enticing the debtors to partner with him in defrauding the master.

The steward had been cultivating a grandiose delusion that after his dismissal he would be able to live in comfort without having to dig or beg. Psalm 10:6 could describe the steward’s state of mind: He said in his heart “I will not stumble, for all time I will not come to harm.” (Robert Alter’s translation¹)

But such a self-congratulatory frame of mind does not last forever. Sooner or later, whether in this life or on the Day of Judgement, the unrepentant sinner will get his comeuppance. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that every person may receive the works of his body, according to what he has done, whether it be good or bad. (2 Corinthians 5:10 NMB)

Be not deceived: God is not mocked. For whatever a man sows, that he will reap. (Galatians 6:7 NMB)

We know that the master was sacking the steward for malfeasance. The steward could well have been doing many different things (actions and omissions) that wasted the master’s goods. We are not told all the unrighteous things the steward had been doing. All we are told is that when he was given notice, he quickly reduced the debtors’ bills (verses 5-7).

Many people have assumed that the steward’s action of reducing the debtors’ bills must have been part and parcel of his unrighteous course of conduct, i.e., they assume that in verses 5-7 the steward was illegally discounting the bills. However, that assumption may not be valid. As part of his unrighteous course of conduct, the steward may previously have been issuing inflated bills (invoices), and verses 5-7 may indicate that he was now correcting the ledger of debts.

Let us now consider these two options in more detail. I’m not saying which of these options is more realistic. The steward is, after all, only a fictional character — Jesus is not telling a factual narrative. But the two options are worth pondering, especially the second one, because I believe it can open a window into the psychological-moral point that I have seen in the wording of verse 9.

1. If his discounting the bills was illegal, each of the debtors were secretly agreeing to partner with the steward in defrauding the master.

The wording of the parable depicts the steward as a man who had been maintaining his stiff-necked conscience, thinking only about his earthly comforts, clinging to his sins, and continuing to seek the cushy, temporal, earthly rewards of being friends with the world, the flesh and the devil. We can imagine that he could have been motivated by fear because the poor is hated even by his neighbor (Proverbs 14:20a NASB). He would have been afraid that if he set foot in his neighbours’ houses too often, they would become weary of him and hate him (Proverbs 25:17).

1 Timothy 6:10a
For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. (NIV)
For covetousness is the root of all evil, (NMB)

Secret partnerships to defraud someone may not last forever. There is no honour among thieves. Were the master or his new steward to later find out about those secret deals, the master would probably not have been happy and the steward’s comfortable lifestyle would probably not have lasted indefinitely.

2. If his discounting of the bills was a correction of the ledger, the steward was correcting illegally inflated invoices which he had issued in the past. In that case, the steward bore guilt for having issued illegally inflated invoices, and the debtors bore no guilt in signing the reduced bills.

A deceitful accountant can issue an inflated invoice to a customer, and the customer will pay the invoice thinking he is being charged fairly for goods or services rendered. At the same time, the deceitful accountant can secretly keep a record of what the invoice ought to have been (a lower amount). In the days before electronic banking, when bills were paid by hard cash or by delivery of goods (such as oil or wheat) to the creditor, when records were kept manually and many people of the lower classes were not very literate or numerate, the customer would pay the (illegally inflated) bill, and the deceitful accountant could cream off for himself the amount he had inflated the bill by. In other words, a deceitful accountant can maintain two ledgers, a deceitful ledger, and a truthful ledger, in order to illegally acquire riches for himself.

If he had been illegally inflating the invoices to enrich himself, and if he then faced the truth of his unquiet conscience, came clean in his own heart (‘circumcised his heart’), admitted and accepted his shame-worthy duplicity, and made things right by reducing the debtors’ bills to what they ought to have been, this process would have entailed him facing, digesting, and metabolising his feeling of shame for having done wrong. It would have meant accepting and “befriending” those shame-worthy facts about himself. Previously, he would have experienced those facts as his enemy, pricking always at his conscience. He would have been pushing away those facts, so they did not plague his breast. But if he then moved towards and accepted those facts, those facts would no longer be his enemy, they would become his friends. By acknowledging and repenting of his sins, he would make peace with his conscience and would make things right by correcting the ledger of debts.

I intentionally chose the words face, digest, and metabolise because those words speak to our neurobiology — how our minds are embodied not just in our skull-brains, but our heart-brains and our belly-brains. And the eye is actually a part of the skull-brain.

I love this paragraph by Matthew Lee Anderson because it speaks to the neurobiological experience of shame:

Shame destroys our interiors, causing our bones to melt and our faces to hide from the gaze of others. We escape its oppressive force not through self-talk or self-willing, but from the outside-in. As we behold in our mind’s eye and heart the gaze of God looking at us, accepting us as one who is not ashamed to be affiliated with us, the light will rise to our eyes and our strength will return. And as our friends and neighbors risk their good names and reputation by affiliating with the shameful, we will regain the social esteem that is so central to our flourishing.
— Overcoming Shame, by Matthew Lee Anderson

Anderson goes on to say: “The only thing we can do with our shame, then, is feel it to the very bottom before we give it away and allow others to carry it for us — lest it consume us in the end.” I think that sentence of Anderson’s needs clarification. A genuinely repentant sinner feels his shame to the very bottom, humbly shares his shame with God by confessing his sinfulness, and begs God for mercy. But a genuinely repentant sinner doesn’t allow his fellow humans to carry his shame for him. He doesn’t pour his shame onto others by falsely accusing them. In particular, he doesn’t shift the blame to those he has harmed (which is what abusers typically do). A genuinely repentant sinner does not engage in DARVO: he does not Deny, Attack, and Reverse the Victim and Offender.

Biblical Hebrew uses language that conveys the neurobiological experience of shame. For example, the ancient Hebrews thought that the kidneys were the seat of the conscience.²

If you want to learn more about neurobiology, I highly recommend this podcast: Interpersonal Neurobiology — How Relationships Can Change Our Brains. The first few minutes is a fast-paced intro which some trauma survivors may find a bit difficult to listen to, but once it gets into the interview it is excellent. Both the podcast presenter and the woman being interviewed are secular therapists.

Verse 9 — the tricky verse

⁹ And I say also to you, make friends for yourselves with the wicked mammon, so that when you depart this world, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

The tricky questions are:

• Why is it called “wicked” mammon?
• What does “make friends for yourself with” mean in this verse? (It cannot mean we ought to use our wealth wickedly.)
• What is the referent for the pronoun they?

I’m proposing that the wording in verse 9 can shed light on the process of a sinner befriending the truth about his shame-worthiness, no matter how uncomfortable that truth makes him feel. Befriending the truth about one’s shame-worthiness is an essential part of repentance unto faith in Christ. But before I defend my proposal, we will firstly examine the common modern interpretation of verse 9, and secondly, we will look at the interpretation given by William Tyndale in the 1500s.

The common modern interpretation, which is reinforced by modern translations.

In my opinion, the common modern interpretation is flawed. John Piper is representative of this interpretation, so I will quote him.

When he calls it unrighteous mammon, or unrighteous wealth, he simply means this is part of the unrighteous world in which you live. So he says, “Use money — take hold of it, and use it for eternal, spiritual purposes. Namely, to provide security in eternity.”

What does that mean? How do you do that? How do you use money to secure eternal dwellings with friends?

…making friends with money means using your money to meet people’s needs. That’s the way to lay up treasure in heaven that does not fail, or as Jesus says in Luke 16, “Some of those people will be converted and will go before you into heaven and welcome you there with great joy to join them in eternal dwellings” (my paraphrase).

Here’s the basic point: Don’t worry about being a shrewd investor in this age, where you can provide a future that will only fail. Instead, be a really shrewd investor by investing in people’s lives. Use your resources to do as much good as you can for the glory of God and the eternal good of others — others who will go before you and welcome you home.
Does Jesus commend dishonesty in Luke 16? — Desiring God.

Piper says that mammon is called “unrighteous” because wealth is simply a part of the unrighteous world in which we live. But the Bible doesn’t say money is the root of all evil. It says the love of money is the root of all evil.

Furthermore, Piper is sailing dangerously close to the wind of the heretical doctrine of salvation by works. He is intimating that we can provide security for ourselves in eternity by the way we use worldly riches in this fallen world.

In keeping with the common interpretation that Piper exemplifies, many translations of verse 9 give the idea that we are to make friends for ourselves by means of unrighteous wealth. For example:

• (RSV): And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous mammon, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal habitations.
• (ESV) And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous wealth, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal dwellings.

Those translations sound like a Christianised version of Dale Carnegie’s self-help book How to Win Friends and Influence People. The problematic wording is “by means of” — it suggests a mechanistic formula for salvation: “Do good deeds, and you will enter heaven.”

Salvation comes not by doing good works, but by faith (John 6:28-29). Salvation comes by faith alone — faith in God’s merciful and loving gift to us in the Second Person of the Godhead who came incarnate into the world, lived a perfect life and died a death He did not deserve, becoming a sin-offering for us, taking the penalty due for all sin. All who repent and have faith in Him are forgiven, cleansed, and receive His righteousness.

The footnote in the ESV Study Bible tries to qualify its rendering of verse 9, to avoid the error of salvation by works. It says, in part:

Because wealth will inevitably fail both to satisfy and to provide for eternal needs, Jesus exhorts his disciples to make friends for yourselves in the generous use of wealth and possessions for the care and well-being of others, so that when wealth does fail, they may receive you into the eternal dwellings. “They” probably refers to the “friends” who have been helped by such generous giving. Believers who use their wealth and possessions generously in this way give evidence of their faith and commitment to God and of their understanding that God will give eternal rewards to those who are generous in their use of the resources he has entrusted to them.

To me, the idea that “They” probably refers to the “friends” who have been helped by such generous giving seems like fancy footwork that does not ring true. It presupposes that some (at least) of the people I have assisted by my financial generosity will end up in heaven. There is no such guarantee in Scripture.

It is true that those who are saved will receive eternal rewards in heaven according to how much genuine (not chaff-like) good they have done in their lives on earth (1 Corinthians 3:12-13). And we can infer (from Luke 15:7, 10) that the departed saints rejoice in communing with a saint who has just entered heaven. But the ESV note does little to mitigate the ESV’s dangerous translation. Even when read in conjunction with the ESV note, the ESV translation does not rule out the idea that the individuals who I have financially assisted have the power and authority to admit me to heaven. No one has that power and authority except God Himself! Saints have no agency in deciding who will be saved.

A believer has eternal security no matter how little or how much true good (not chaff) the believer did in this world. The thief on the cross was promised eternal security even though he had done no good in his life. He was promised salvation because he repented and believed on Jesus.

The only difference the believer’s earthly deeds will make in heaven will be the measure of rewards the believer will enjoy in heaven. Click here for some Bible verses about rewards. However, it is not wise for me to speculate on my eternal rewards, because such speculation can easily lead to egotism, pride, and the attempt to manipulate God.

The steward I’ve imagined in option two was not correcting the ledger of debts in order to earn salvation for himself. Nor was he correcting the ledger because he had an eye on increasing his eternal rewards. Having repented of his sin, he would have corrected the ledger because that was plainly the right thing to do. …When you have done all the things that are commanded of you, say, We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which was our duty to do. (Luke 17:10 NMB)

William Tyndale’s interpretation of verse 9

Tyndale’s interpretation is found in his book The Parable of Unrighteous Mammon which was first published in 1527. You can buy it as a paperback or read it online here [Internet Archive link]. (I could only find an online version at an Adventist site, which is ironic because Adventists are known for their legalistic blending of salvation by works with salvation by faith.) I have gently updated some of Tyndale’s spelling, wording and punctuation.

Tyndale gave a more nuanced definition of mammon:

mammon is a Hebrew word, and signifies riches or temporal goods, and namely, all superfluity, and all that is above necessity and that which is required unto our necessary uses, wherewith a man may help another, without undoing or hurting himself. For hamon, in the Hebrew speech, signifies a multitude or abundance, or many; and hence comes mahamon, or mammon, abundance, or plenteousness of goods, or riches.

Tyndale suggested that it is called unrighteous mammon because it is not bestowed and ministered unto our neighbour’s need.

…it is called “unrighteous mammon” … because it is in unrighteous use. As Paul says in Ephesians 5, “The days are evil,” although God has made them, and they are a good work of God’s making: howbeit they are yet called evil, because evil men misuse them; and much sin, occasions of evil, peril of souls are wrought in them.

…it is called unrighteous mammon, because it is not bestowed and ministered unto our neighbor’s need. For if my neighbor need and I give him not, neither give liberally to him of that which I have, then I withhold from him unrighteously that which is his own. Forasmuch as I am bound to help him by the law of nature, which is, “Whatsoever thou wouldest that another did to thee, that do thou also to him;” and in Matthew 5, “Give to every man that desireth thee;” and in John 1, “If a man have this world’s good, and see his brother need, how is the love of God in him?” And very few men see this unrighteousness in our mammon, because it is spiritual; and in those goods which are gotten most truly and justly are men much beguiled. For they suppose they do no man wrong in keeping them; in that they got them not with stealing, robbing, oppression, and usury, neither hurt any man now with them.

On the tricky phrase “make friends with”, Tyndale said:

Now when Christ saith, “Make you friends of unrighteous mammon,” “Gather you treasure together in heaven,” and such like: thou seest that the meaning and intent is no other but that thou shouldst do good; and so it will follow of itself naturally, without seeking and taking of thought, that thou shalt find friends and treasure in heaven, and receive a reward.

So let thine eye be single, and look unto good living only, and take no thought for the reward, but be content: forasmuch as thou knowest and art sure, that the reward, and all things contained in God’s promises, follow good living naturally.

For they that look unto the reward, are slow, false, subtle and crafty workers, and love the reward more than the work; yea, hate the labor; yea, hate God which commandeth the labor; and are weary both of the commandment, and also of the commander; and work with tediousness. But he that worketh of pure love, without seeking of reward, worketh truly.

… heaven, everlasting life, joy eternal, faith, the favor of God, the Spirit of God, desire and strength unto the will of God, are given us freely of the bounteous and plenteous riches of God, purchased by Christ, without our descryings, that no man should rejoice but in the Lord only. [Descry means to catch sight of or discover something, often from afar.]

We have already seen the ESV’s suggestion that “they” refers to people — the ESV’s note opines that “They” probably refers to the “friends” who have been helped by such generous giving.

Tyndale is much more precise and nuanced. For Tyndale, “they” may indirectly reference the friends we make among the impoverished and afflicted people whom we help and succour by giving of our abundance:

Thy friends are the poor, which are now in thy time, and live with thee; thy poor neighbors which need thy help and succor. Them make thy friends with thy unrighteous mammon; that they may testify of thy faith, and thou mayest know and feel, that thy faith is right, and not feigned.

But Tyndale mainly took the view that “they” refers to our good deeds, rather than to the people who have been helped by our good deeds. He said “they” refers to the good deeds a person does when he has superfluity of wealth and bestows out of his abundance to assist the poor. He argued that good works make us feel our faith, make us sure in our consciences, and make us feel the mercy of God.

thy good works do but testify only, and certify thee that the Spirit of God is in thee, whom thou hast received for an earnest of God’s truth; and that thou art heir of all the goodness of God, and that all good things are thine already, purchased by Christ’s blood, and laid up in store against that day, when every man shall receive according to his deeds, that is, according as his deeds declare and testify what he is or was.

…the poor give us an occasion to exercise our faith; and the deeds make us feel our faith, and certify us, and make us sure that we are safe, and are escaped and translated from death unto life, and that we are delivered and redeemed from the captivity and bondage of Satan, and brought into the liberty of the sons of God, in that we feel desire and strength in our heart to work the will of God.

In modern English we sometimes use the personal pronoun “they” for our deeds and actions. But we do not say “they” (our deeds) “can receive us into a place”. The word “deed” is an impersonal noun, and modern English prose tends not to ascribe human features (like the ability to receive a person into a place) to impersonal nouns. But the Bible’s metaphorical language often ascribes human characteristics to impersonal nouns, e.g., Genesis 4:11; John 12:48; Luke 19:40.

Tyndale again —

And at that day shall our deeds appear and comfort our hearts, witness of our faith and trust, which we now have in Christ; which faith shall then keep us from shame, as it is written, “None that believeth in him shall be ashamed.” So that good works help our faith, and make us sure in our consciences, and make us feel the mercy of God.

Tyndale’s teaching that our good works testify to our faith comports with Jesus’ statement that His works bore witness to His Sonship. The works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me. (John 10:25b NMB)

Tyndale argued that not the saints, but God only, receives us into eternal habitations —

[of] receiving into everlasting habitations, [it] is not to be understood that men shall do it. For many, to whom we show mercy and do good, shall not come there.

How shall the saints receive us into heaven, when every man has need for himself that God only receive him to heaven, and every man has scarce for himself? As it appears by the five wise virgins, who would not give of their oil unto the unwise virgins. And 1 Peter 4 says that the righteous is with difficulty saved.

My suggested interpretation of verse 9

I agree with Tyndale’s interpretation, so I’m not wanting to challenge it. I’m merely proposing an interpretation which can complement Tyndale’s.

I need to get technical for a moment, so please bear with me. 😊 In verse 9, the Greek text combines two nouns to form a noun phrase.³ The NMB translates that noun phrase as wicked mammon. The KJV translates it as mammon of unrighteousness.

I’d like to draw our particular attention to one of the nouns in that noun phrase. Emphasis mine:

• NMB: Make friends for yourselves with the wicked [adikea] mammon
• KJV: Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness [adikea]

I believe the Greek word adikea in this noun phrase can give us a deeper understanding of the ethical point which Jesus’ words can point to. Like all words, adikea has a range of meanings. It can mean injustice, unrighteousness of heart and life, a deed violating law and justice, or the guilt of unrighteousness. I’m going to focus on the last meaning — the guilt of unrighteousness.

The Greek word which English versions render as “friends” is philous. All English translations of verse 9 have rendered philous as the noun object of the verb “make”.⁴  Vines Expository Dictionary says, “philos, primarily an adjective denoting ‘loved, dear, or friendly,’ became used as a noun.”

So, adikea can mean guilt — the guilt of unrighteousness. And the word philos was primarily an adjective (‘friendly’) which became used as a noun (friend). I would therefore like to suggest that verse 9 could be understood as “Make yourselves friendly with the guilt you bear for using wealth unrighteously.” If that makes no sense to you, keep reading, as I am about to explain.

Potentially, the steward could have accepted the grave reality which he had been previously evading and denying. He could have accepted that he was guilty of injustice: that he had been unrighteous in heart and life, and his deeds had violated law and justice.

Let us imagine that the steward (or any sinner) accepted and “befriended” those shame-worthy facts about himself. He would have previously experienced those facts as his enemy, pricking always at his conscience. He would have been pushing away those facts, so they didn’t plague his breast. But if he then moved towards and accepted those facts, those facts would no longer be his enemy, they would become his friends. By acknowledging and repenting of his sins, he would make peace with his conscience.

By accepting that he had followed a sinfully duplicitous course of conduct, he would be facing, digesting, and metabolising his feeling of shame for having done wrong.

Facing, accepting and feeling duly ashamed of one’s sin, prompts repentance and reformation of behaviour.

Jesus said to His disciples, You are my friends, if you do whatsoever I command you. (John 15:14 NMB)

Do you not know that the friendship of the world is enmity toward God? Whoever will be a friend of the world, is made the enemy of God. (James 4:4 NMB)

Let us think about the steward’s conscience. Before the master found out that the steward had been wasting the master’s goods, the steward would have been evading conviction of conscience. He would have been suppressing the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18), constantly fighting against the pricks of his conscience.

Romans 2:15 describes the unquiet conscience: They show the deeds of the law written in their hearts, while their conscience bears witness to them, and also their thoughts, accusing one another or defending. (NMB) The steward’s internal self-talk had been a constant battleground with his thoughts alternately accusing him or defending him. This type of inner dialogue is brilliantly conveyed in the song The Mercy Seat (the link goes to Johnny Cash’s version).

If his conscience was still peeping into his awareness because he had not completely seared it, he would have been facing not only the question of how he would provide for his body, but a far bigger question: the moral dilemma in his breast. Would he go on seeking the earthly, temporal rewards of unrighteousness? (2 Thessalonians 2:10; Romans 6:13; 2 Peter 2:13, 15) Or would he give up his sin and seek the eternal reward of righteousness? (Revelation 22:12)

Faced with losing his job and his powerful status in the community, weary of hypocritically justifying himself, the steward could have given up fighting against his conscience and come to grips with the reality and seriousness of his sin. And, as his first step of living honestly before God and man, he would have corrected (reduced) the debtor’s bills to show what they really owed.

I am not saying this is what the steward did. I am only painting a picture of what the steward could potentially have done, had he genuinely turned from sin and come to salvific faith in Christ. The picture I’ve painted is consistent with my suggested interpretation of verse 9.

For behold, the kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21b) — i.e., the kingdom of God can be found by surrendering that battle in your breast and giving in to the conviction of conscience, which is God calling you to repentance.

When you are invited [into the kingdom of God], go and sit in the lowest seat, so that when he who invited you comes, he may say to you, Friend, sit up higher. Then you will have honour in the presence of those who sit at food with you. (Luke 14:10 NMB)

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9 NMB)

Therefore lay apart all uncleanness, and all lingering evil and vice, and receive with meekness the word that is grafted in you, which is able to save your souls. (James 1:21 NMB)

But if you do not do this [obey God’s instructions], you will certainly sin against the LORD — and be assured that your sin will find you out. (Numbers 32:23 BSB)

For everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light lest his deeds should be reproved. But whoever does truth comes to the light, so that his deeds may be known, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:20-21 NMB)

The person who believes on the Son has everlasting life, and the person who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. (John 3:36 NMB)

Kiss the Son, lest He be angry and you perish in your rebellion, when His wrath ignites in an instant.
Blessed are all who take refuge in Him. (Psalm 2:12 BSB)

There are two essential truths which a person must accept and believe to receive salvation.

When an unrighteous person accepts and becomes friendly with the shame-worthy truth that he is guilty before God for having behaved unrighteously, and when he trusts in Christ’s cleansing blood, Christ will receive him into everlasting habitations when he dies. Christ will receive him because he has honestly accepted two truths: the truth about himself, and the truth of the gospel.

The seismic reorientation of accepting those two truths is a gift from God; none of us could have made that reorientation unless the Father revealed His love toward us through Jesus.

So what do I think is the referent for “they” in verse 9? While concurring with Tyndale that “they” refers to the good deeds a person does when he has superfluity of wealth and bestows out of his abundance to assist the poor, and that good works make us feel our faith, make us sure in our consciences, and make us feel the mercy of God, I can take Tyndale’s idea further. The pronoun “they” might allude to the two essential truths which a regenerate believer accepts: the truth about his shame-worthiness, and the truth of God’s merciful forgiveness of us for Christ’s sake. Taking up residence in these truths and promises, we enter eternal habitations.

As the hymn Rock of Ages says: Foul, I to the fountain fly; wash me, Savior, or I die.

If you continue in my words, then you are my very disciples and shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. (John 8:31-32 NMB)

William Tyndale on the two essential truths which a regenerate believer accepts:

The right Christian man consents to the law — that is, that it is righteous — and justifies God in the law in that he affirms that God, who is the author of the law, is righteous and just. He believes the promises of God and justifies God, judging him true, and believing that he will fulfill his promises. With the law he condemns himself and all his deeds and gives all the praise to God. He believes the promises and ascribes all truth to God. Thus in every way he justifies God and praises God.
— A Pathway Into the Holy Scripture [Internet Archive link] by William Tyndale

My proposal about verse 9 is consistent with the final teaching which Jesus makes in the passage: No servant can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will lean to the one and neglect the other. You cannot serve both God and mammon.

Psalm 141:4-5, Book of Common Prayer, 1649:

⁴ O let not mine heart be inclined to any evil thing : let me not be occupied in ungodly works with the men that work wickedness, lest I eat of such things that please them. ⁵ Let the righteous rather smite me friendly : and reprove me.

Let the Holy Spirit smite me friendly; let the Holy Spirit confront my conscience. (my paraphrase)

The Pharisees mock Jesus, and He rebukes them

After Jesus draws the moral application of the parable, the Pharisees mock Him. And Jesus smites them. Luke 16:14-15 (NMB):

All these things the Pharisees also heard, who were covetous; and they mocked him. And he said to them, You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For that which is highly esteemed among men, is abominable in the sight of God.

The word translated “covetous” (philargyros) is a compound word formed from philos (friendly) and agyros (silver). It could be literally translated as “fond of silver”. I’m no expert in Greek, but it seems like the word philos (friendly) is being used in a wordplay in this passage. The wordplay strikingly contrasts the unrepentant sinner’s fondness of worldly riches, with the repentant sinner’s fondness for the two essential truths which must be believed for salvific faith.

Jesus’ denunciation of the Pharisees’ love of money was a big theme of His ministry. It had been evident in the previous chapter of Luke (15:14-15). It continued after the parable of the unjust steward, in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, where Jesus contrasts the two eternal destinations: the poor man Lazarus ends up in Abraham’s bosom, and the selfish wealthy man ends up in hell. The resurrection of life, and the resurrection of damnation (John 5:29).

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 (Alter¹) —

The last word, all being heard: fear God and keep His commands, for all that is humankind.
Since every deed will God bring to judgement, for every hidden act be it good or evil.

Endnotes

1.  The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary [Affiliate link], by Robert Alter.

2.  Kidneys as the seat of conscience. See Robert Alter ibid., Psalm 16:7 where he comments, “It is not clear how peoples of the Ancient Near East arrived at the ascription of sundry functions to the various internal organs.” My thoughts: the kidneys are located just below the diaphragm, roughly the same height in the abdomen as the solar plexus [Internet Archive link]. Modern neurobiology has shown that in our abdomen, and in our heart, there are nerve cells similar to brain cells. Hence, some trauma therapists talk about “the skull brain, the heart brain and the belly brain”.

3.  In Luke 16:9, both mammon and adikea are in the genitive case, which (in non-technical terms) means they belong to each other. Verse 11 in the same pericope also uses the two words adikea mammon (…if you have not been faithful in the wicked mammon, who will believe you in that which is true?). But in verse 11, adikea is an adjective qualifying the noun mammon, whereas in verse 9 adikea is a noun combining with mammon into a noun phrase.

4.  Someone I know who has studied Greek has suggested additional reasons why the translators have rendered philous in verse 9 as a noun, rather than an adjective:

• Adjectives qualify nouns. There appears to be no noun that philous is qualifying.
• An adjective, especially one with the article, that does not accompany a noun with which it agrees, can be used as though it were a noun. The adjective can thus function as the equivalent of a noun. This is sometimes done in English with the plural; for example, “blessed are the meek” means “blessed are the meek people,” even though people is not expressed. But in Greek this idiom is much more frequent, and occurs in the singular as well as the plural, and of course with the added distinctions of masculine, feminine and neuter.
• Philous is in the accusative case. If it were functioning as an adjective we would expect it to match the dative case of euotois (for yourselves).
• Philous does not match the verb poiasate (make). To match that verb it would need to be nominative instead of accusative.
• Thus, the only way to render it is as the object of the verb “make”.

***

Further reading and viewing

There is no such thing as ethical porn — a post by Andrea Aleksandrova, on Facebook.

Some survivors of abuse get addicted to porn. Women burdened with sins and led astray by various passions is a post at this blog by a woman who developed a habit of using pornography soon after she was born-again. She describes her first marriage where her husband abused her, how she left the abusive husband, and how she entered a Christ-centered recovery program for her irresponsible behaviour regarding pornography and has experienced sobriety for four years.

The importance of being scrupulous with the truth — the link goes to a comment by James on another post on this blog.

Meredith Miller on abuse dynamics — Meredith Miller helps people recover after relational trauma. For victims of abuse, she recommends the relentless facing of reality, while she also acknowledges that the person who has been victimised has to want to know the truth, because understanding the truth can be very painful.