Luke chapter 16

vs 11

This verse shows up our lack of kingdom focus so much that it isn't funny. We in the west are so well off, so rich, that we don't even recognise how rich we are. If we can't recognise that, how are we ever going to recognise true riches, that is, spiritual richness?

vs 12

We are not rich with our own property! All this stuff very much belongs to God, in the same way that all the master's stuff belonged to the master, and not the manager. A father is always going to have problems passing on his hard-earned fortune as inheritance to a son who does not show that he has the ability to manage it well.

vs 13

Just aside from the God and Wealth thing a moment, this sort of talk by Jesus is incredibly politically inflammatory. Judea is currently run by a Roman government, and then has a Jewish religious hierarchy. So Jesus, in saying that you can't serve to masters, could well be interpreted by people as talking about those who are loyal to the High Priest, and those who are loyal to Caesar. Even though that is not his main message here, to the Jewish mind it would be clear that Jews cannot serve both masters.

It is interesting also that, 2000 years ago, Jesus' main warnings about idolatry are regarding wealth. It is God vs Money to Jesus. Also, God vs Religion. And yet, even though Jesus was stronger on these than probably any other sinful attitude or activity, these are probably still the two things the western world struggles with more than anything else. Amazing.

vs 14

I'll bet there's a lot of people today who would sneer at Jesus too. We're even worse - we tend to put our faith into money to make things happen. "Need a cure for cancer? If we had 25 billion dollars, I'll bet we could do it!"

vs 15

Jesus sees their sneers, and he pounces on them! No holding back, the gloves are off for Jesus. Remember, though, that this statement by Jesus is not a formula. It doesn't work that "IF men like something THEN God detests it." If you really want to be formulaic about it and yet remain theologically sound, you would have to reverse it, "IF God detests something, THEN men are sure to value it due to their sinful nature".

The truth is that we as humans can value the things of God, and that doesn't therefore make holiness and righteousness detestable. But the Pharisees were seeking the justification of men, not of God, and that is detestable.

vs 16

Of course, the Law and the Prophets were proclaimed after John TB as well. What Jesus is doing is drawing a basic dividing line, saying that until John the Baptist, the Law and the Prophets was the preaching people heard. Now, with the arrival of Jesus, there is a new era - a preaching that focuses on the kingdom of God.

There is a translation debate about vs 16, regarding the 'forcing their way into it'. Some people say that biazo, to force, is passive, and therefore it should read "all people are urged insistently to enter in". This therefore allows for the fact that people generally aren't rushing to enter the kingdom of God.

I can handle that, but obviously there are other scholars to think that "forcing his way into it" is the proper translation. And I think there are heaps of people who try and do this. Under the Law, the Pharisees did this - they tried to force their way into Heaven through obeying a set of rules that they made up, drawing the standard at a level where they could accomplish it. People still do this today. "I am basically a good person" is what most people think will get them into heaven.

So then the Law and the Prophets wane in focus and the good news of the Kingdom ofGod is in focus. Do people still try and force their way in? You bet! "If God is a loving God, he won't send me to hell!" they say! Again, they are adjusting theology to draw a line which will get them into heaven (but not evil people like Hitler - never Hitler or Paris Hilton).

I'll let you decide what you think it says, but I'm happy with either of those. I think the translation as it stands makes a whole lot of sense to me and my experience of the average person's theological bent.

vs 17

Jesus wants to make the point clear, though, that those who drop the Law and Prophets in favour of the Kingdom of God are going to be sorely disappointed. In the same way that you can't rewrite the Law to let you be perfect, you also cannot drop the Law and make God a cosmic Granddaddy who lets in everyone and gives them a lolly. The existence and ferverent preaching of the Kingdom by Jesus does not make the Law disappear.

vs 18

He makes that clear in this verse. This verse is not about adultery. Ok, it is about adultery, but Jesus doesn't just bring it up out of the blue here, and Luke doesn't just say "Oh, Jesus said that thing about adultery, I need to slot that in. Chapter 16 will do, I've got some room in between that story about Lazarus and that sermon about the Law and the Prophets". The point Jesus is making is that just because he is preaching the good news about the Kindgom, that doesn't annul your marriage. The Law on marriage, divorce, and adultery, does not disappear because Jesus is preaching the Kingdom. In fact, it is a lot harsher than you might expect! The Law is eternal, just like the Kingdom of God is eternal. You can't rewrite the Law just because the Kingdom of God is near.

You might say "What, so Christians have to follow every jot and tittle of the OT Law?" That issue isn't covered here.

vs 19

Now we go onto another story. I heard someone say the other day that this story is not a parable, it is a true story, because it doesn't say "And Jesus told this parable". Sorry, I think that's a load of baloney. Having said that, I also think the people who say "Hell isn't real, because Jesus only talks about it in stories" is like saying that rich and poor people aren't real, because he only talks about them in stories. Grow a brain!

So, there's this rich person. Purple is a very expensive colour back in the day, hence it is the colour of royalty. This rich person doesn't necessarily exist, but rich people do as a rule.

vs 20-21

At the rich man's gate, there's a complete loser called Lazarus. He's obviously poor, he's covered in sores, and even dogs lick him. Poor guy. That doesn't mean that Lazarus is a real person, but it also doesn't mean that poor people with sores don't exist. As a rule, they did. Probably more of them than there were rich people wearing purple.