the role of the lukan parables in terms of the purpose of luke's gospel

the role of the lukan parables in terms of the purpose of luke's gospel the role of the lukan parables in terms of the purpose of luke's gospel

etd.uovs.ac.za
from etd.uovs.ac.za More from this publisher
05.06.2013 Views

2. Wealth and Possessions It is all the more obvious that four parables in the Travel Narrative (12:13-21; 14:15-24; 16:1- 13, 19-31) are explicitly of wealth and possessions, since these parables are immediately accompanied by teaching on the same theme in their context. 1 Covetousness of possessions (12:13-15) and anxiety about life (12:22-34) surround the parable of the Rich Fool. The parable of the Great Feast is instantly followed by the teaching of Jesus that “when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind” (14:7-14). In the same vein, the parable of the Unjust Steward has the instruction that “you cannot serve God and mammon” (10-13) as its conclusion, whereas the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus has, as its introduction, the lesson about “the Pharisees, who were lovers of money” (14-18). As a result, all these parables serve to stress the theme of wealth and possessions in Luke as a warning of dependence on, and indulgence in, wealth without recognizing God’s ownership to possessions, 2 and caring for the poor, and using one’s possessions sensibly, wisely and generously. The Good Samaritan (10:25-37) and the Prodigal son (15:11-32) also implicitly carry teaching of the right use of possessions respectively either positively or negatively. On the other hand, in the attitude to wealth and possessions, a nameless ruler (18:18-30) stands in a sharp contrast to Zacchaeus the tax-collector (19:1-10). In this case, a change of attitude to possessions plainly functions as a sign of repentance. Apart from the above parables, if we cast the net wider, we can see more examples of the teaching of possessions in Lukan parables than there is thought to be, since almost every situation in life involves economic resources (7:40-43; 12:57-59; 14:28-30; 18:1-7). 3 However, it is appropriate to not enumerate more examples at this stage. All things considered, it becomes clear that ‘Wealth and Possessions’ is one of the major theological themes that occur throughout the Lukan parables. In what follows, I will show how this theological theme is in line with the major themes of Luke’s theology. Having seen that the theme of wealth and possessions which is one of the predominant themes in Luke’s Gospel is closely connected with what we have examined thus far, the 1. Forbes, The God of Old: The Role of the Lukan Parables in the Purpose of Luke’s Gospel, 229-30. 2. In handling one’s own possessions, it may be a starting point to recognize, above all, that all possessions came from God. 3. Nolland, “The Role of Money and Possessions in the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32),” 192-93, rules out the parable of the Prodigal Son from this category of parables about the use of money or possessions in Lukan parables, and allocates only three parables (12:16-21; 14:12-14; 16:19-21), as opposed to Holgate, to the category. See also Holgate, Prodigality, Liberality and Meanness in the Parable of the Prodigal Son: A Greco- Roman Perspective on Luke 15:11-32, 69-88. 165

marginalized, it is natural that here we, as the proper procedure, take up the theme of wealth and possessions. It has been argued that Luke’s concern for wealth and possessions is selfevident in the light of the different layers of tradition in Luke. 4 In the first place, compared to Mark’s and Matthew’s material, Luke’s material lays special emphasis on the theme. In Lk 5:11, Peter and his companions respectively left everything, whereas in Mark’s parallel, the word for “everything” is absent, and instead they left their nets and their father respectively (Mk 1:20). In the same way, Luke, in the story of the call of Levi, adds to Mark the mention that Levi left everything and followed Jesus (Lk 5:28 cf. Mk 2:17). Similarly, in the story of the rich young ruler, Luke has also added the word “all” to Mark, namely, “sell all that you own” (Lk 18:22 cf. Mk 10:21). In the sending out of the twelve, Luke, in contrast to Mark (Mk 6:8), records that the disciples have virtually no possessions at all (Lk 9:3). The prime reason for this seems to be an emphasis on full dependence on God, not on the material possessions. The emphasis on wealth in the Luke’s Beatitude, in contrast to Matthew’s version (esp. Mt 5:3), is all the stronger because of diametrical contrasts between the poor and the rich, through blessing and woe (Lk 6:20, 24). To sum up, it is tenable to say that such redactional changes point to Luke’s concern to accentuate the theme. 5 In addition, we can also ascertain his great concern for wealth and possessions from material unique to Luke’s Gospel (1:47-55; 3:10-14; 6:24-26, 34-35, 38; 12:13-21; 14:12-14, 33; 16:1-9, 14; 19-31; 19:1-10). We can say that Luke’s concern for this is virtually consistent throughout Acts in various forms. First of all, the early Christian community is introduced as a model in an attitude to wealth and possessions, in the sense that they held not only everything in common, but used it for the common good (2:43-47; 4:32-35). In Acts 10:2, Cornelius who feared God with all his household, “gave alms liberally to the people.” Tabitha in Joppa “was full of good works and acts of charity” (9:36). Paul said that he came to Jerusalem “to bring to my nation alms 4. D.L. Mealand, Poverty and Expectation in the Gospel (London: SPCK, 1980), 12-37; Esler, Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology, 164-69; Schmidt, Hostility to Wealth in the Synoptic Gospels, 166-67; G. Theissen, The Gospels in Context: Social and Political History in the Synoptic Tradition (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 288; John Gillman, Possessions and the Life of Faith: A Reading of Luke-Acts (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1991), 15; Tuckett, Luke, 96-99; Forbes, The God of Old: The Role of the Lukan Parables in the Purpose of Luke’s Gospel, 230. 5. Against the contention that redactional changes in Luke’s Gospel generally present Luke’s concern to wealth and possessions, Mealand, from a different angle, argues that Luke does not accentuate this theme, but, in contrast to Mark and Matthew who softened the tradition, was simply loyal to tradition. For him this is largely because there is no consistent tendency to grow the severity of Mark and Matthew to the theme. Mealand, Poverty and Expectation in the Gospels, 16-20. See also, Schmidt, Hostility to Wealth in the Synoptic Gospels, 166-67; Theissen, The Gospels in Context: Social and Political History in the Synoptic Tradition, 288. 166

2. Wealth and Possessions<br />

It is all <strong>the</strong> more obvious that four <strong>parables</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Travel Narrative (12:13-21; 14:15-24; 16:1-<br />

13, 19-31) are explicitly <strong>of</strong> wealth and possessions, s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong>se <strong>parables</strong> are immediately<br />

accompanied by teach<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> same <strong>the</strong>me <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir context. 1 Covetousness <strong>of</strong> possessions<br />

(12:13-15) and anxiety about life (12:22-34) surround <strong>the</strong> parable <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Rich Fool. The<br />

parable <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Great Feast is <strong>in</strong>stantly followed by <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> Jesus that “when you give a<br />

feast, <strong>in</strong>vite <strong>the</strong> poor, <strong>the</strong> maimed, <strong>the</strong> lame, <strong>the</strong> bl<strong>in</strong>d” (14:7-14). In <strong>the</strong> same ve<strong>in</strong>, <strong>the</strong><br />

parable <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Unjust Steward has <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>struction that “you cannot serve God and mammon”<br />

(10-13) as its conclusion, whereas <strong>the</strong> parable <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Rich Man and Lazarus has, as its<br />

<strong>in</strong>troduction, <strong>the</strong> lesson about “<strong>the</strong> Pharisees, who were lovers <strong>of</strong> money” (14-18). As a result,<br />

all <strong>the</strong>se <strong>parables</strong> serve to stress <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>me <strong>of</strong> wealth and possessions <strong>in</strong> Luke as a warn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong><br />

dependence on, and <strong>in</strong>dulgence <strong>in</strong>, wealth without recogniz<strong>in</strong>g God’s ownership to<br />

possessions, 2 and car<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> poor, and us<strong>in</strong>g one’s possessions sensibly, wisely and<br />

generously. The Good Samaritan (10:25-37) and <strong>the</strong> Prodigal son (15:11-32) also implicitly<br />

carry teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> right use <strong>of</strong> possessions respectively ei<strong>the</strong>r positively or negatively. On<br />

<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> attitude to wealth and possessions, a nameless ruler (18:18-30) stands <strong>in</strong><br />

a sharp contrast to Zacchaeus <strong>the</strong> tax-collector (19:1-10). In this case, a change <strong>of</strong> attitude to<br />

possessions pla<strong>in</strong>ly functions as a sign <strong>of</strong> repentance. Apart from <strong>the</strong> above <strong>parables</strong>, if we<br />

cast <strong>the</strong> net wider, we can see more examples <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> possessions <strong>in</strong> Lukan<br />

<strong>parables</strong> than <strong>the</strong>re is thought to be, s<strong>in</strong>ce almost every situation <strong>in</strong> life <strong>in</strong>volves economic<br />

resources (7:40-43; 12:57-59; 14:28-30; 18:1-7). 3<br />

However, it is appropriate to not<br />

enumerate more examples at this stage. All th<strong>in</strong>gs considered, it becomes clear that ‘Wealth<br />

and Possessions’ is one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> major <strong>the</strong>ological <strong>the</strong>mes that occur throughout <strong>the</strong> Lukan<br />

<strong>parables</strong>. In what follows, I will show how this <strong>the</strong>ological <strong>the</strong>me is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with <strong>the</strong> major<br />

<strong>the</strong>mes <strong>of</strong> Luke’s <strong>the</strong>ology.<br />

Hav<strong>in</strong>g seen that <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>me <strong>of</strong> wealth and possessions which is one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> predom<strong>in</strong>ant<br />

<strong>the</strong>mes <strong>in</strong> Luke’s Gospel is closely connected with what we have exam<strong>in</strong>ed thus far, <strong>the</strong><br />

1. Forbes, The God <strong>of</strong> Old: The Role <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Lukan Parables <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Purpose <strong>of</strong> Luke’s Gospel, 229-30.<br />

2. In handl<strong>in</strong>g one’s own possessions, it may be a start<strong>in</strong>g po<strong>in</strong>t to recognize, above all, that all possessions<br />

came from God.<br />

3. Nolland, “The Role <strong>of</strong> Money and Possessions <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Parable <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32),” 192-93,<br />

rules out <strong>the</strong> parable <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Prodigal Son from this category <strong>of</strong> <strong>parables</strong> about <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> money or possessions <strong>in</strong><br />

Lukan <strong>parables</strong>, and allocates only three <strong>parables</strong> (12:16-21; 14:12-14; 16:19-21), as opposed to Holgate, to <strong>the</strong><br />

category. See also Holgate, Prodigality, Liberality and Meanness <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Parable <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Prodigal Son: A Greco-<br />

Roman Perspective on Luke 15:11-32, 69-88.<br />

165

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!