Laurie,
You are very astute, right
off for recognizing that this (Luke 16) is not like
other parables, and I would go so far as to agree
with you and say that it is not really a parable at
all. Just like the “parable” of the rich man and
Lazarus in this same chapter has been debated over
as to whether it is a parable or not and many have
concluded that it is not for the same reasons that I
say that this first one is also not a parable, and
one reason is both begin with the words “There was a
certain rich man…”
Luke 16:
1.
And he said also unto his
disciples, There was a certain rich man,
which had a steward…
19. There was a certain
rich man, which was clothed in purple
and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every
day:
In Dake’s Annotated
Reference Bible, he goes to great lengths to point
out why the rich man and Lazarus is not a parable
but is an actual account about real people and one
of his proofs is that Jesus said “There WAS a
certain rich man” And Dake says well, there was or
there wasn’t so if Christ says there was then He
wouldn’t lie and we can know that there really was…
However Dake then goes ahead
and calls the previous one “The Parable of the
Unjust Steward” yet it begins the same way.
You are also correct that
the rich man in this one is God but the steward is
not in this case a type of Christians or servants
but in fact refers to Lucifer. The next thing that
needs to be understood is that the “mammon of
unrighteousness” that Jesus speaks of does not refer
to money as we know it but is focused on a higher
plane of spiritual reality than our world and its
commerce.
What we have here in this is
an actual account of real happenings in the higher
realms of heaven when Lucifer was once in charge of
the worship that was coming in to God and just as
money is the symbol of glory in our world, worship
is that in heaven. It was Lucifer’s job to receive
the worship in some capacity and then deliver it in
some way unto God just as a steward of a business
handles the money coming in and is responsible for
depositing it into the account of the owner of the
company. But just as happens in our world sometimes,
there is the temptation of the steward to “embezzle”
some of the money that he is responsible for and
want it for himself. This is what Lucifer did when
he wanted to be equal with God and be worshipped
himself and when it was discovered, he was called
out by God and “fired” and when this happened he
quickly had to assess his situation and come up with
some plan for his future.
Luke 16
1. And
he said also unto his disciples,
[notice it does not say ‘He spake a parable…’] There was
a certain rich man, [God] which had
a steward [Lucifer]; and the
same was accused unto him that he had wasted
[embezzled] his
goods.
2. And
he called him, and said unto him, How is it
that I hear this of thee? give an account of
thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer
steward. [“You’re fired!”]
3. Then
the steward said within himself, What shall I
do? for my lord taketh away from me the
stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am
ashamed. [Lucifer is like a
“white-collar” criminal at this point and cannot
do manual labor type work and of course his
enormous pride would not allow him to beg.]
4. I
am resolved what to do, that, when I am put
out of the stewardship, they may receive me
into their houses.
So, Lucifer comes up with a
plan and we see that the goal of his plan is to be
received into someone’s houses. It is so important
that we understand what happens next, because it
blows the roof off of Satan’s plan that he has been
using to ensnare mankind for all of history. Satan
must have panicked when he heard Jesus telling this
because he knew it was about him and what he was
doing. He must have feared that this could spoil the
whole scheme because it involves him deceiving his
victims the way a con-artist does and the last thing
a con-artist wants is for his “mark” to become aware
of his scheme but Jesus reassures him that his plan
will still be amazingly successful and then Jesus
does something profound. He actually encourages
Satan to go ahead with his evil plan because it will
ultimately be mutually beneficial to His own Kingdom
as well.
So, let’s look at what this
unjust steward does:
5. So he called every one
of his lord's debtors unto him, and said unto
the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?
At this point I could go off
into a lengthy discussion on the “Hegelian
Dialectic” because this loosely is in a way what is
being described here and though the name comes from
Hegel the man who supposedly may have coined or is
credited with coming up with this scheme, it was in
fact Satan all the way back in the Garden of Eden
who really came up with this scheme.
Here is some info on it
including a quick outline of how it is structured in
society:
http://www.jeremiahproject.com/newworldorder/hegelian-dialectic.html
The
Problem Reaction Solution Paradigm
- The government
creates or exploits a problem blaming it on
others.
- The people react
by asking the government for help willing to give
up their rights.
- The government
offers the solution that was planned long before
the crisis.
Here’s another one:
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm
You may have heard of it as
“thesis, antithesis, synthesis,” or “problem,
reaction, solution, but what it is, is a way of
getting what you want by manipulating someone else
into a problem, sometimes one that you created in
the first place so that you can come up with a
solution that they will then need and by you
supplying the solution you are empowered over them.
That’s the synthesis. This is precisely what took
place in the Garden of Eden and has been going on
ever since. God has provided us with the only means
of escaping this evil scheme but we must use our
wisdom to take full advantage of what God has
provided us with or else the escape route or “door”
out will do us no good.
This is why this
understanding is so important in our discussion
concerning the law and grace.
I will leave this today
because I have to go and I cannot write of this in a
rapid manner but I will post more tomorrow, Lord
willing.