ROUGH DRAFT--NOT FOR CITATION
What Should I Do?
Money and the Gospel of Luke
Everyone who is seriously committed to being a disciple of Jesus Christ eventually finds himself or herself directly confronted with the issue of stewardship. We want to be good and generous stewards of our resources, but every rise in income seems to be met with a corresponding rise in obligations. We have legitimate concerns to provide food, shelter and clothing for ourselves and our families, and yet we are aware of so many other legitimate needs in our world. We want to support our local churches, our missionary enterprises, and compassionate ministries, yet we are faced with a myriad of other obligations. We need to fund our children’s college educations and our own retirement accounts, but we want to sponsor needy children in developing nations and pastors on the mission field. Our families would be more comfortable in a larger home, but many families are homeless. What should our priorities be? How do we decide between our conflicting impulses and choose among our assorted responsibilities? What should we do?
Life in the middle class is characterized by an absence of both poverty and abundance. We don’t often find ourselves needing to discover a use for uncommitted surpluses. We want to help the poor, but we feel every act of generosity on a very personal level. We see much that we would like to do, but our resources are limited. We cannot do everything and we face the inevitable question: What should I do? This question is not new. It is as old as the gospel of Luke. In response to his preaching, John the Baptist was confronted by tax collectors, soldiers, and others who asked him this same question: “What should I do?” (Luke 3:10-14). These repentant and recently baptized converts looked to John the Baptist for answers. For those of us who proclaim Christ as Lord and Savior, we must ultimately look to the Scriptures for answers to that question. In this chapter, we will look to the Gospel of Luke for answers to our questions about what we should do with our economic resources. We will try to gain a clearer understanding of what the gospel of Luke teaches about the believer’s relationship to money and use of it.
One of the interesting features of the gospel of Luke is how easily you can answer the question of what you should do with your money. You could follow the advice of John the Baptist to the soldiers and “be content with your wages” (3:14), or his advice to the tax collectors and “collect no more than is due you” (3:13), or even his advice to the multitudes and share your food and clothing with those who have none (3:11). Or you could follow Jesus’ admonition in the sermon on the plain and “give to everyone who begs from you” (6:31). Or you could follow Jesus’ command to the twelve and retain nothing, “no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money—not even an extra tunic” (9:3). Or you could follow Jesus’ instructions to the rich ruler and “sell all that you own and distribute the proceeds to the poor” (18:22). Or you could follow the example of Zacchaeus and give away half of your possessions (19:1-10). Or you could follow the example of the good Samaritan and give away a few days wages (two denarii, 10:35). Or you could even follow the example of the unjust steward and cheat other people in order to secure your own financial future (16:1-9).
The real problem is not finding an answer to the question of what to do, but finding only one answer. The Gospel of Luke speaks about money and stewardship so frequently that isolated verses can be found to support nearly any course of action. We can use texts like those above to justify maintaining our current economic status, or investing prudently for our future, or giving from our surplus, or giving away all of our possessions. We can force the Gospel of Luke to say almost anything we desire to hear simply by selecting the verses that appeal to us, isolating those verses from their contexts, and emphasizing the themes found in those verses. But would such isolation and selective emphasis really be listening to the gospel? If we are to be true disciples of Jesus, shouldn’t we listen to all that God has to say to us through the Gospel of Luke and allow ourselves to be transformed by our time spent journeying with Jesus? Let’s travel with Jesus, John the Baptist, the disciples, Mary, Martha, and the other characters in Luke’s gospel and seek to learn what God would have us do.
The language of finance appears very early in Luke’s gospel. When Mary was told by the angel that she would give birth to Jesus, she celebrated the coming of the Messiah in song and proclaimed:
My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
for he has looked upon the lowliness of his servant. …
He has brought down the powerful from their thrones,
and lifted up the lowly;
he has filled the hungry with good things,
and sent the rich away empty. (1:46b-47a, 52-53, NRSV).
Mary rejoiced about God’s salvation and in God’s reversal of the world’s normal mode of operation. In the world as Mary knew it, the powerful remained upon their thrones and the lowly remained lowly. The hungry were seldom filled with good things and the rich were never sent away empty. But in the world as Mary has come to see it in light of God’s long-awaited Messiah, the lowly have already been raised, the powerful have already been brought down from their thrones, the hungry have already been filled, and the rich have already been sent away empty.
For Mary, the coming of the Messiah and of God’s salvation meant the arrival of justice and wholeness for the downtrodden. In the normal order of things, the rich and powerful remain rich and powerful, while the poor and powerless remain poor and powerless. But Mary’s soul rejoiced because God, through Christ, reversed the normal order of things. Mary was so certain, so supremely confident, about God’s reversal of this world’s order that she spoke of this reversal in the past tense (“has brought down… and lifted up,” and “has filled… and sent away”) even before the birth of her son, Jesus.
In Luke’s gospel, Mary’s soul magnified God because God does not play by the normal rules. In Christ, God turns everything upside down and inside out. In Christ, God transforms reality so that the powerful no longer exploit the powerless and the contented no longer dismiss the needy. But how is this sure and certain vision of the future brought into existence? If the vision of God’s transformed world is certain, how is the believer to live in the time leading up to the complete fulfillment of this vision? These questions, characterized both by a willingness to believe and by an eagerness to participate, plague not only us; they also plagued believers shortly after Mary first offered this vision of God’s righteous rule through Christ.
John the Baptist, the forerunner who prepared the way for Jesus, announced the arrival of the kingdom of God and laid out a vision of life made right and of life freed from adversity. John quoted the prophet Isaiah, proclaiming:
Prepare the way of the Lord,
make his paths straight.
Every valley shall be filled,
and every mountain and hill shall be made low,
and the crooked shall be made straight,
and the rough ways made smooth;
and all flesh shall see the salvation of God (3:4b-6).
Although John used geographical rather than socio-economic images, he, like Mary, envisaged a world made right, a world in which God’s saving love has removed the structures of adversity and hardship. This world is created by the redeeming love of God, the unseen actor who fills the valleys, makes low the mountains and hills, straightens the crooked places, and makes smooth the rough ways.
When the crowds heard John’s words and wanted to help “prepare the way of the Lord,” John urged them to “bear fruits worthy of repentance” (3:8). Three times John was asked essentially the same question. Luke recorded these questions and John’s answers for us:
And the crowds asked him [John the Baptist], “What then should we do?” In reply he said to them, “Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” Even tax collectors came to be baptized, and they asked him, “Teacher, what should we do?” He said to them, “Collect no more than the amount prescribed for you.” Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what should we do?” He said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or false accusation, and be satisfied with your wages” (3:10-14).
Three times John was asked what one must do in order to prepare for the salvation of God, and three times he answered by emphasizing a life of stewardship. John told the crowds that they were to share their surplus (their spare clothes and food) with those in need. He told the tax collectors that they were not to exploit their positions of power for personal gain. He told the soldiers that they were not to exploit or extort people and that they were to be content with their wages.
For John, those who wanted to participate in God’s new world were to begin living by different principles as they prepared for its arrival, because God’s new order had overturned the selfish and adversarial principles of the existing order. Whereas the existing order is characterized by greed and dominated by the desire to acquire and accumulate, the new order is characterized by generosity and guided by the desire to give and to distribute. For John, soldiers and tax collectors, who together symbolized the established powers in John’s ancient world, were to be content with their wages and were not to exploit their authority for the sake of perceived personal gain. Greed and the desire to accumulate belong to the existing order, but the existing order has been overturned in Christ! The old rules no longer apply. Those who participate in the new order no longer operate by the obsolete principles of the acquisition and accumulation. Those who participate in the new order are freed from the tyranny of self-indulgence and are freed to seek the well-being of others. Because of their unshaken confidence in God’s salvation, the redeemed of the new order are empowered to share their resources. Looking beyond the seeming realities of this present world, the redeemed orient their lives toward the new and encroaching reality of God’s kingdom, a kingdom free from the self-protective and isolationist impulses so characteristic of the present order. For John, greed, financial exploitation, and self-aggrandizement belong to a dead and rotting tree that already has an ax laid to its root (3:9). The redeemed experience the joy of participating in a new order that frees people from adversity and hardship.
This same theme of deliverance from hardship and adversity appears at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in his first sermon at a Nazareth synagogue. Jesus, like John, drew upon the words of the prophet Isaiah and pronounced:
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor (4:18-19).
For Jesus, as for Mary and John in Luke’s gospel, the mission of the Messiah was to transform the oppressive and dehumanizing forces within the existing order. With these words, Jesus called an end to the oppressive and adversarial forces that diminish human well-being. This impending “year of the Lord” touched every area of human life. Jesus drew upon economic (“poor”), political (“captives” and “oppressed”), and medical (“blind”) language to convey his vision of a world made right. The Spirit of the Lord was active through Christ, overcoming captivity, blindness, and oppression. The new order brought into being by Jesus’ words encompasses and transforms every aspect of human existence.
Mary, John and Jesus all affirmed the arrival of a new reality, the arrival of a world made right, a world freed from adversity and hardship. Yet even after we have been gripped by the power of this new and transforming reality, many of us continue to wonder how we should respond to the presence of this new order? How should we live? Or, to join in refrain with the tax-collectors and soldiers, “What should we do?” With this powerful vision of the kingdom of God provided by the early sayings of Mary, John, and Jesus in mind, we will now journey with Jesus through Luke’s gospel, examining Jesus’ teachings and watching the lives of Jesus and his disciples, to discover how we should live and what we should do.
The Call to Newness
After announcing the arrival of this new reality in his ministry, Jesus began calling others to help him bring this new reality into the present order. Jesus first issued his transforming call to three fishermen: Simon, James, and John (5:1-11). After using one of their boats as a floating speaker’s platform, Jesus instructed Simon to take the boat into the deep water and to cast out his nets. Although Simon had just finished washing his nets from the previous night’s fishing, at Jesus’ word, he returned to the deep water and resumed his fishing. He soon found his nets overflowing with fish. In the ordinary order of things, Simon would have hauled the fish to shore, begun processing them and thus secured his unexpected surplus. But Jesus did not come to reaffirm the ordinary order of things! Instead of securing and protecting his windfall, Simon fell down before Jesus and confessed his sinfulness. Then, at Jesus’ bidding, he “left everything and followed” Jesus (5:11).
Some honest and well-meaning believers have suggested that Simon’s conduct provides a model of how all subsequent Christian believers should dispose of their possessions. That is, all disciples of Jesus should abandon their possessions and order their lives around the ideal of “gospel poverty.” Other honest and well-meaning believers have suggested that Simon’s conduct provides a model of how all subsequent Christian believers should view their possessions. That is, all disciples of Jesus should develop a spiritual detachment from their possessions, even though not all believers need to order their lives around the principle of literal poverty. The key issue for understanding Luke’s story is determining exactly what Simon left. Simon did, of course, leave “everything,” but it may be significant that all of the things mentioned in the story are associated with his vocation. This brief story mentioned the lake where Simon fished (v. 1), the boats with which Simon fished (vv. 2, 3, 7, 11), the nets with which Simon fished (vv. 2, 4, 5, 6), the business partners with whom Simon fished (vv. 7, 10), and the fish that Simon caught (vv. 6-9). The things (the “everything”) that Simon left, therefore, appear primarily to be the things associated with his vocation as a fisherman. In response to Jesus’ announcement that he was to begin “catching people” (v. 10), Simon left everything that identified him as a fisherman.
Levi, the next person called to discipleship in Luke’s gospel, also “left everything” (5:27-29). Levi, like Simon, James and John, was practicing his vocation when called to discipleship. Luke described him as a “tax collector” who was “sitting at the tax booth.” In the normal order of things, tax collectors—those symbols of the ever present and all powerful state—make demands upon peasants and prophets. But the existing order has been overwhelmed by the outpouring of the new order and, with two powerful words from the Lord of the new age, Levi’s life was forever transformed. Jesus said, “Follow me,” and Levi “left everything.”
Levi the tax collector, Levi the man identified only by his unpopular vocation, became Levi the disciple of Jesus Christ. He, like Simon the fisherman, left behind every remnant of his former vocation as a powerful indicator of his allegiance to the new order. This symbolic abandonment of his former life was clear and unequivocal evidence of his new identity. Yet the newness in his life was not primarily a change in Levi’s socio-economic status, for Levi was able to host a “great banquet” in his own home even after he had left “everything” (v. 29). The newness in Levi’s life, like the newness in Simon’s life, was primarily a newness of vocation and mission. Just as Simon the fisherman had become Simon the disciple, Levi the tax collector had become Levi the disciple.
But what should we do? Most of us do not feel called to leave our vocations and to assume a new vocational identity. What should we do? In Luke’s gospel, Jesus had many disciples who, like most of us, were not called to leave their vocations to literally follow Jesus. Shortly after his calls for Simon and Levi to leave their vocations and follow him, Jesus addressed a group of disciples who had not been called to literally follow him (6:17-36). Luke assures us that these “non-following” disciples were also eager to participate in the new reality Jesus creates. They “had come to hear him [Jesus] and to be healed of their diseases; and those who were troubled with unclean spirits were cured” (v. 18). Jesus’ message to these disciples echoed his earlier message in the synagogue as he reaffirmed the transformation of reality occurring in his ministry by proclaiming blessedness upon the disenfranchised and marginalized. Emphasizing both their present blessedness and their future vindication, he announced:
Blessed are you who are poor,
for yours is the kingdom of God.
Blessed are you who are hungry now,
for you will be filled.
Blessed are you who weep now,
for you will laugh (6:20b-21).
And then, in keeping with the earlier announcements of a divine reversal, Jesus continued
by warning:
But woe to you who are rich,
for you have received your consolation.
Woe to you who are full now,
for you will be hungry.
Woe to you who are laughing now,
for you will mourn and weep (6:23-24).
Whether one is called to literally follow Jesus and to assume a new vocational identity or not, Jesus’ message is consistent in Luke’s gospel. All persons may take confidence in the certainty of the radical transformation of life and society occurring through the ministry of Jesus. Although persons are called to respond to this transformation of reality in different ways within Luke’s gospel, this divine reversal of life and society is equally assured for everyone. Things will not continue to be as they have always been. The poor, the hungry, and the sorrowful will be cared for; the rich, the full, and the merry-makers will come to know judgment.
Because this coming reversal is so certain in Luke’s gospel, Jesus taught his disciples to live in anticipation of the coming reality. Rather than orienting themselves to the corrupt and dying order of this world, they were to orient themselves to the fresh and vibrant order of the coming kingdom. The arrival of the coming order has negated the appeal of the existing order and reversed priorities for the true disciple. The present order teaches people to hate their enemies; Jesus teaches people to love their enemies (6:27). The present order tells people to strike out at those who hate them; Jesus teaches people to do good to those who hate them (6:27). The present order encourages people to retaliate, returning curse for curse and blow for blow; Jesus teaches people to reconcile, returning blessings for curses and non-violence for violence (6:28). In Luke’s gospel, Jesus taught his disciples to orient themselves to the transformed reality of the developing kingdom.
Because the present order is doomed to obsolescence, only the foolhardy orient themselves to it. The impending reversal of the existing order renders the accepted patterns of this world empty. Disciples see the certainty of the coming order and understand the futility of living by the norms of the present age. Jesus taught this lesson about the new reality with a series of examples and rhetorical questions, explaining:
If you love those love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again (6:32-34).
In Luke’s gospel, Jesus emphasized the absurdity of disciples behaving like those who espouse the principles of the present order. Sinners—those who belong to the present age—love those (and only those!) who love them, do good to those (and only those!) who do good to them, and lend to those (and only those!) who are able to repay them. But disciples, those who belong to the coming age, march to the beat of a different drummer. They reject the “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch your back” principles of the existing order. Disciples understand that this present order is passing away and they live by the norms of the coming order, which enables them to love their enemies, to do good to everyone, and to lend without regard for repayment (6:35).
Within Luke’s gospel, some disciples like Simon and Levi were called to abandon their old vocations and to establish new ones. Other disciples, like the unnamed disciples addressed in chapter six, did not experience such career disruptions. However, all disciples participated in the inauguration of the new order. Some disciples left everything and literally followed Jesus; others continued laboring at their former vocations and gave witness to the kingdom by exhibiting the features of kingdom life and embodying the principles of the coming age. Interestingly, some of the first persons to embody the principles of the coming age were women who shared their economic resources with Jesus (8:1-3). According to the Gospel of Luke, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna, and “many other women” provided financial support for Jesus’ ministry. These women did not leave everything to literally follow Jesus, but their responses to Jesus’ message were as appropriate as the responses of the following disciples. They provided the funds to support the itinerant ministry of Jesus and the disciples who traveled with him.
The collapse of the existing order called forth different responses from different persons. From those called to literally follow Jesus, Jesus twice selected groups to travel in his name with unique missions. The first group, composed of twelve disciples who symbolized Jesus’ concern for the twelve tribes of Israel, was given power to heal wounded humanity by casting out demons and by healing diseases (9:1-6). The particular urgency and circumstances of their mission required them to accept uniquely stringent restrictions upon their conduct. Jesus instructed them: “Take nothing for your journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money—not even an extra tunic” (v. 3). The second group, composed of seventy disciples who symbolized Jesus’ concern for the seventy nations of the earth (see Gen. 10), was sent ahead to prepare the way for the journey to Jerusalem that Jesus had just begun (9:51). Jesus’ instructions to the seventy paralleled his instructions to the twelve (10:1-12). He commanded them: “Carry no purse, no bag, no sandals; and greet no one on the road” (v. 4).
According to the rules of the existing order, no one would travel without some means of support. But Jesus’ ministry proclaimed the dawn of a new order, and the messengers of this new order could not be distracted from the urgency of their mission by needless encumbrances. In fact, the mission was so urgent that the envoys were not even allowed to greet people along the way. These missionaries were to have a single-minded focus upon their message. If the urgency of these two missions required setting aside the normal rules for travel, then so be it. These missionaries understood that the normal rules no longer applied.
Teachings from the Journey to Jerusalem
Shortly after the missionaries returned to Jesus and reported the success of their missions (10:17-20), Jesus told the now famous parable of the good Samaritan (10:25-37). Jesus told the parable in response to a question from a lawyer who was seeking to justify himself. The lawyer knew that he should love his neighbor and he was trying to define his obligations by asking Jesus, “Who is my neighbor?” (v. 29). Of course, the lawyer’s question was really just a subtle way of asking questions that are common within the existing order: “Who is not my neighbor, and who am I free not to love? What are the limits of my responsibility?” By the rules of the existing order, one loves only those who have some right to that love. So the lawyer wanted Jesus to define “neighbor” so that he would know who had a right to his love. With this knowledge safely under his belt, the lawyer could then safely ignore all “non-neighbors” who had no right to his love.
But Jesus didn’t play by the old rules. Jesus came to inaugurate a new age, so he refused to define “neighbor.” Instead, Jesus told a story. A man was robbed and left along the road “half-dead.” While the man was lying there, a priest and a Levite passed by the man on the other side of the road. These guys worked in the temple and they fully understood the way things worked. If they helped this half-dead man and he had the audacity to die, they would be ritually unclean and would not be able to perform their important duties in the temple. For the priest and Levite, worship was important. This wounded man threatened their ritual purity and, thus, their worship. So, in keeping with the normal way of doing things, they walked by on the other side of the road. Then, a Samaritan, one of the people whom the disciples had recently wished to destroy in a storm of hell fire (9:54), approached the wounded man. In the normal way of doing things, a Samaritan, who was hated by the Jews, would also pass by on the other side. In the normal order of things, Samaritans did not help Jews. But the Samaritan reversed the normal order of things. The Samaritan embraced the principles of the coming kingdom and helped his wounded enemy by putting him upon his own donkey and taking him to an inn for medical care. He even gave the innkeeper money to care for the wounded man’s ongoing convalescence.
The lawyer, who wanted to define and limit his obligations, epitomized the thinking of the existing order. He sought to establish limits and to define boundaries; he thought in terms of doing only what was required, only what was necessary. The Samaritan, who sought to expand and enlarge his arena of service, epitomized the thinking of the new order. The Samaritan sought to destroy boundaries and to overcome limits; he thought in terms of doing everything that was needed, everything that was possible. The lawyer had asked, “Who is my neighbor?” The Samaritan went out and became a neighbor. The lawyer understood the existing order and sought limits, boundaries, and stinginess; the Samaritan understood the coming order and promoted expansion, outreach, and generosity. Jesus urged the lawyer to look at the example of the Samaritan and to “go and do likewise” (10:37).
If the good Samaritan symbolized the thinking of the coming order, the main character in Jesus’ subsequent parable symbolized the thinking of the existing order (12:13-21). In his response to a request that he serve as arbitrator in a dispute over an inheritance, Jesus first warned: “Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions” (v. 15). Then Jesus told a parable about a rich man and his response to unexpected abundance. The man’s lands produced such excess that his barns and storage bins could no longer contain the produce, leading the man to ask himself, “What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?” (v. 17). The rich man no doubt had become wealthy by adhering to shrewd business practices, and he knew how things worked. He decided to tear down his barns and build bigger barns in which to store his bounty for the future. He could then retire to many years of relaxation, eating, drinking, and merry-making. His plan made perfect sense within the existing order of things, but through Christ God had overthrown that order. Therefore, God spoke to the would-be retiree and exclaimed, “You fool!” (v. 20). The dawning of the new age had rendered the rich man’s principles of acquisition and accumulation obsolete. Under the new order, security is not found in acquisition and accumulation. Only a fool would engage in the futile enterprise of seeking security by mastering the principles of the existing order.
Jesus elaborated on the futility of seeking security within the existing order when he instructed his disciples in subsequent verses: “Do not worry about your life, what you will eat, or about your body, what you will wear” (12:22). In Luke’s gospel, worry belongs to the existing order with its desire to find security in acquisition and accumulation. Because he understood that worry stemmed from the impulse to add to one’s life, Jesus asked the rhetorical question, “Can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life?” (12:25). Under the principles of the existing order, one adds to life by accumulating possessions. Under the principles of the coming order, one adds to life by trusting the Father. Thus, Jesus admonished his disciples: “Do not be afraid, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom” (12:32). Worry and the mistaken belief that security is found in acquisition belong to the existing order; fearlessness and the calm assurance that security is found in the Father’s goodness belong to the coming order. Those with allegiance to the existing order will forever be apprehensive about their future and frightened by the vulnerability of their accumulated resources; those with allegiance to the coming order are able to sell possessions and give alms (12:33), because their security is found in God’s provision and not in their own resources.
Jesus picked up this theme of freeing oneself from the smoldering grip of acquisition and accumulation again in the fourteenth chapter of Luke, warning the crowds that “any one among you who does not give up all of his or her possessions cannot be my disciple” (14:33). In the parable of the rich fool, Jesus had already taught about the foolishness of attempting to attain security through the accumulation of material resources. With this announcement in Luke’s gospel, Jesus warned the disciples that not only must they avoid seeking security in possessions, but that they must also take more decisive action by giving up all of their possessions. Preoccupation with money and the desire for money belong to the existing order and thus make it impossible to be a disciple of the coming order. Only those who have abandoned the existing order’s obsession with acquisition are able to participate in the realities of the coming age. The existing order encourages one to cling to all of one’s money; the coming order enables one to give up one’s money.
Of course, Jesus is not advocating an absolute separation from the sum of one’s resources. Such literal separation would be more consistent with the thinking of the existing order and its obsessive interest in materialism than with the thinking of the coming order and its negation of the existing order’s preoccupation with personal acquisition. In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus was not concerned with the amount of resources held by the disciples, but rather with the degree to which possessions had a hold on the disciples. Jesus was urging his disciples to give up any spiritual and emotional attachments to their possessions, because such attachments could hamper their commitment to discipleship.
In fact, in this section of Luke’s gospel, Jesus warned about three sets of attachments that could exclude one from discipleship. Jesus warned:
If anyone comes to me and does not hate his or her father and mother and spouse and children and brothers and sisters and even his or her own life cannot be my disciple…
Whoever does not bear his or her own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple…
Thus, therefore, anyone among you who does not renounce all of his or her possessions cannot be my disciple (14:26, 27, 33).
These exclusionary rules clearly teach that discipleship is so all encompassing that it precludes the possibility of “second class” discipleship. One either fully participates in the coming order and is a first class disciple or else one cannot be a disciple at all. Yet one should not assume that these rules must be taken literally. When Jesus called disciples to hate their family members, he was obviously not calling his disciples to literally hate their family members. Rather, Jesus was emphatically warning the disciples not to allow their legitimate commitments to other persons to interfere with their commitment to kingdom living. And likewise, when Jesus warned that whoever did not carry his or her cross could not be his disciple (14:27), he was not advocating literal crucifixion as the entrance requirement for discipleship. Rather, in these sayings about possessions, family, and cross bearing, Jesus was saying that his disciples should be so thoroughly committed to the coming order that the materialism and cronyism and self-centeredness of the existing order should have no hold on them. Thus, even though Jesus did not advocate literal self-impoverishment, he did warn his disciples that participation in the coming order required a complete reversal of the values system of the existing order. Within the new order as Jesus presented it, disciples were to live as harbingers of a new reality, a reality in which existing norms and patterns were reversed. Therefore, when disciples hosted a banquet or dinner, instead of inviting their well-to-do friends, they were to invite the poor and the lame who could not possibly return their hospitality (14:12-14). The rules of the existing order taught that one hosted only those who were able to return the favor, but disciples were to reverse these social norms. Disciples could do so, because they had given up the quest for the money, possessions, influence and power so valued by the existing order.
Disciples were to realize that material resources were put to worthwhile purposes only when they were used to prepare for the coming kingdom. In Luke’s gospel, Jesus used the rather shocking parable of the unjust manager to again teach about the appropriate uses of money (16:1-13). In this parable, a manager had neglected his duties and had been given termination notice by his employer. In order to gain good will from his employer’s debtors and their eventual willingness to assist him during the economic hardship that laid before him, the manager went to his employer’s debtors and reduced their respective debts. Then, in a surprising turn of events, the manager’s employer commended him for acting “shrewdly” (v. 8). In his own commentary on the story, Jesus instructed the disciples to “make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes” (v. 9).
Of course, Jesus was not recommending dishonesty. Rather, he was recommending shrewdness. Disciples should know that the stuff of the present age must be used in light of the coming age. Under the norms of the existing order, one used financial resources to secure temporal goals. But disciples should understand that the normal order of things is no longer relevant and that financial resources should be used to secure more lasting goals, goals consistent with the values of the coming age. Jesus urged his disciples to behave shrewdly, not shrewdly in view of the existing order, but shrewdly in view of the coming order. Disciples were to use the fleeting and temporal to secure the enduring and eternal.
The next parable in Luke’s gospel provides a sad example of how one man failed to use the fleeting and temporal resources of this world to secure enduring and eternal rewards. Jesus told the story of two men who experienced a reversal of fortunes (16:19-31). One man was wealthy and enjoyed all the benefits afforded by wealth in the ancient world. He lived in a large home with a courtyard, ate fine foods in a festive atmosphere, and dressed in the purple robes of royalty. Life was splendid for him. But at the gate to his lavish courtyard laid Lazarus, a poor beggar who was covered with sores and ravished by hunger. Death came to both men. In their lives, Lazarus and the rich man had seen increased hardship and adversity added to existing hardship and adversity and they had seen additional prosperity and privilege added to existing prosperity and privilege. The general rule of things was that people got more of the same. But in death, God reversed the normal order of things. Lazarus, the former beggar, feasted at the bosom of Abraham, while the rich man went to a place of torment. When the rich man complained about this fate, Abraham reminded him:
Remember that during your lifetime you received your good things,
and Lazarus in like manner evil things;
but now he is comforted here,
and you are in agony (v. 25).
During their lifetimes, the rich man’s abundant wealth had been of no benefit to Lazarus. After death, this wealth provided no benefit to the rich man. Had the rich man participated in the reality of the coming age and shared his abundance with the poor man, that wealth could have benefited both Lazarus in his lifetime and the rich man after his lifetime. But the rich man chose to orient himself to the existing order. His refusal to participate in the reversal of the existing order did not make that reversal any less certain and substantial. His refusal to participate in that reversal during the present age did, however, force him to experience that reversal after death, and he was in agony.
Later in Luke’s gospel, Jesus encountered two rich men, a synagogue ruler (18:18-30) and a tax collector (19:1-10). The synagogue ruler asked Jesus the provocative question, “What should I do to inherit eternal life?” (18:18). Jesus responded by directing the man to the commandments:
You know the commandments:
You shall not commit adultery;
You shall not murder;
You shall not steal;
You shall not bear false witness;
Honor your father and mother (18:20).
The man quickly responded to this list of commandments by claiming that he had obeyed these commandments since he was a child. Jesus did not dispute the man’s claim to have obeyed these commandments, but he did point to a previously unspoken commandment that the man had not obeyed: “There is one thing lacking. Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven” (v. 22).
The ruler may have kept each of the five commandments that Jesus had just mentioned, but he had failed to keep the tenth commandment, the commandment prohibiting covetousness. The “one thing” that the ruler lacked was obedience to the tenth commandment. Jesus had listed five commandments, and, in a prideful boast, the man claimed to have kept all of those commandments since his youth. The ruler may in fact have kept those five commandments since childhood, but as soon as Jesus challenged him to sell all of his possessions, the ruler’s unwillingness to part with his possessions made him realize that he had not obeyed the commandment against coveting. Because he was unwilling to begin obeying that commandment, he went away sorrowful. In the greatest of ironies, the ruler was unwilling to release his covetous grip on his wealth because he mistakenly believed that his wealth would make him happy and comfortable. But it was this very grip upon his possessions that greatly saddened him at the very moment when Jesus offered him his greatest joy. In dramatic understatement, Luke recorded that, when the ruler heard Jesus’ command to sell his possessions (and thus to free himself from the reign of covetousness), “he became sad; for he was very rich” (18:23).
Upon seeing the rich man’s sorrow, Jesus explained:
How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!
Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God (18:24-25).
Jesus had seen how the wealthy so often were unwilling to accept the coming order. In the existing order, money and influence and power are hoarded in order to garner additional privileges; in the coming order, money and influence and power are of no avail unless shared with the unprivileged. The disciples had also seen how hard it was for the wealthy to enter the kingdom of God and they wondered out loud, “Who then can be saved?” (18:26). According to the normal order of things, wealth made life easier, wealth increased privilege and expanded opportunities. If it was difficult for the wealthy to enter the kingdom of God, who, the disciples wondered, could possibly be saved? Jesus’ enigmatic answer focused not upon the one who was saved, but rather upon the savior. Jesus reminded the bewildered disciples that “what is impossible for mortals is possible for God” (18:27). In matters of the existing order, human beings achieve on the basis of their personal resources. Thus, the wealthy and powerful enjoy distinct advantages in a world characterized by competition and selfishness. But in matters of the coming order, human beings achieve significant gains only when they look beyond their own resources and abandon themselves to the goodness of the Father. Thus, no one enjoys particular advantages in a kingdom characterized by grace and love. No one who relies upon his or her own resources can be saved. Only those who give up on the possibility of gaining salvation and who then rely upon God to do the impossible can find salvation. Just as God is the unnamed actor who fills the valleys and flattens the hills and mountains, God is the unnamed actor who saves. God is able to do the impossible, saving the rich man, the poor child, the middle class lady. God, and only God, is able to save those (and only those) who are willing to admit that they cannot save themselves.
The second rich man Jesus encountered had already learned this lesson about God’s ability to save (19:1-10). Zacchaeus, whom Luke described as a chief tax collector and rich, responded to Jesus’ call by giving half of his possessions to the poor and paying fourfold restitution to the victims of his previous crimes. Although Zacchaeus was rich like the ruler in the earlier story (18:18-30), Jesus did not direct Zacchaeus to sell all of his possessions. Instead, being quite satisfied with Zacchaeus’s resolve to give away half of his possessions, Jesus announced to Zacchaeus and the crowd of onlookers: “Today salvation has come to this house” (19:9). Why did Jesus command the rich ruler to sell all of his possessions and then commend the rich Zacchaeus for giving away only half of his possessions? Was Jesus being unfair or arbitrary?
To focus upon the amount of possessions that one either gives away or retains is to think in terms of acquisition and accumulation, but those are the terms of the existing order. And Jesus came to bring a new order. As has been noted earlier in Luke’s gospel, Jesus was not concerned about the amount of possessions a disciple held, but rather about the degree of hold those possessions had upon the disciple. Zacchaeus’s willingness to share his possessions with the poor demonstrated that his possessions had no hold on him, proving that salvation had in fact come to his house. In Luke’s gospel, Jesus is not concerned with possessions per se. Jesus is concerned about persons and their willingness to participate in the coming reversal. The ruler was committed to the existing order with its foolish emphasis upon acquisition and accumulation. Zacchaeus was committed to the coming order with its emphasis upon relieving hardship and adversity.
At the End of the Journey
The contrast between the existing order and the coming order is brought into sharp focus in the final week of Jesus’ life when he was at the temple watching persons give their offerings (21:1-4). The wealthy were placing their offerings in the treasury when Jesus saw a poor widow place two mites in the offering. After seeing the gifts of both this poor widow and the wealthy, Jesus commented:
Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all of them; for all of them have contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty has put in all she had to live on (vv. 3-4).
Many persons have understood Jesus’ comments as praise for the widow’s action, but in fact these words should be read as a condemnation of the existing order. In the verse immediately before this story, Jesus warned his disciples to beware of the scribes who “devour widows’ houses” (20:47). Then in this story, Jesus saw a widow’s house being devoured when “out of her poverty” a “poor widow” gave everything that she “had to live on” (21:4). Jesus would have never commended or praised such abuse of a poor widow. Such exploitation of the poor and vulnerable belongs to the existing order, not the coming order! The widow’s offering provided a heart-wrenching example of how the powerful and influential exploit the weak and powerless. Jesus would have seen nothing within this story to rejoice over.
Jesus had just seen the house of a poor widow devoured and he was angered by that abuse of religious authority and influence. In fact, he was so angered by this abuse that his next words predicted the complete destruction of the temple. Luke described the temple as “adorned with beautiful stones and gifts dedicated to God” (21:5), but for Jesus this excessive ornamentation only symbolized the temple authorities’ consistent abuse of their power over the poor. Jesus warned that these symbols of the existing order were doomed to destruction, assuring his listeners: “As for these things that you see, the days will come when not one stone will be left upon another; all will be thrown down” (21:6). In the existing order, the religious leaders too often use their influence and authority to exploit the well-meaning and the religious elite too often build monuments to the success of their institutions. But in the coming order, this pattern of religious exploitation will be judged.
Jesus knew that his prediction of the temple’s destruction would not go unchallenged by the religious authorities and that his decisive confrontation with evil was approaching. In the normal order of things, the powerful are toppled by overwhelming force. But in the new order, the powerful are toppled by overwhelming love. As the ultimate expression of love’s transforming power, Jesus committed himself to death on the cross.
In his final hours with the disciples before he entered into his passion, Jesus reminded his disciples of their earlier missionary journeys. Luke recorded the conversation:
He [Jesus] said to them, “When I sent you out without a purse, bag, or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “No, not a thing.” He said to them, “But now, the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag…” (22:35-36).
By including this discussion in his gospel, Luke clarified the temporary nature of the stringent financial restrictions placed upon the disciples who traveled on missionary journeys for Jesus (9:1-6; 10:1-12). Jesus’ discussion with the disciples revealed that not even these stringent restrictions created adversity and hardship for the disciples. Even though the disciples traveled without economic resources, they lacked “not a thing.” Jesus, as the one who embodied the coming order and the demise of hardship and adversity, reminded the disciples that he, even in the times of greatest urgency, did not participate in the adversarial and oppressive patterns of the existing order. In order to prevent future misunderstandings and misappropriations of these stringent missionary demands, Jesus contrasted these past demands with his expectations for the present and future. Jesus insisted that “now” the disciples were to carry along resources (a purse and bag) that would enable them to support themselves as they proclaimed the message of the kingdom.
So What Are We to Do?
We have found a host of different economic directives and behaviors within the Gospel of Luke. So what should we do? Should we select one set of these diverse directives and behaviors as a model for our personal code of conduct? Or should we perhaps adopt some combination of these economic directives and behaviors as our personal code of conduct? No. In Luke’s gospel, Jesus did not come proclaiming a new ethical code. Jesus came proclaiming the kingdom of God, a kingdom that encroaches upon the present reality, overwhelming and transforming that present reality with the presence of a new and liberating reality. Our goal should not be to imitate any particular set of demands or behaviors, but rather to participate in the new and liberating reality. As believers, we experience the God who reverses the normal way of doing things. We come before the judge of the universe guilty and unclean; He proclaims us innocent and clean. In the normal order of things, a judge pronounces judgment on what we are—guilty and unclean. But in Christ, God has reversed the normal order of things and pronounced judgment on what we may become—innocent and clean. In a miracle of divine reversal, God, by His words alone, transforms us into the innocent and clean creatures He desires us to be.
In the same way that God’s pardoning voice reverses our individual realities, God’s transforming words reverses our corporate realities. Speaking through His servants, God proclaims that, in the kingdom of His Son, God reverses the normal order of things. The rich are sent away empty and the hungry are filled, thrones are brought down and the lowly are exalted, and light is brought to those in darkness. As believers, we rejoice in this divine reversal and learn to live in full anticipation of the coming order. Our faith in the coming reversal produces a transformation that enables us to reject the seeming realities of this doomed and decaying order and to orient ourselves to the sure and certain realities of the coming age. As citizens of the coming kingdom, the present age’s foolish obsession with acquisition and accumulation has no hold on us. As our participation in the coming order frees us from the tyranny of self-absorption, we will find ourselves transformed into agents of liberation. Because we have experienced the arrival of the coming kingdom and its divine reversal in our lives, we are empowered to share its transforming presence with other persons. By participating in the new order we are freed from the tyranny of self-indulgence and are empowered to cooperate in God’s subversion of the remnants of hardship and adversity that linger as the existing order fades into obsolescence. Our participation in the coming kingdom frees us from the isolationist and self-protective impulses of the present age and enables us to look beyond ourselves and to share our resources with those in need.
What are we to do? We are to participate in the coming kingdom.
Balch, David L. "Rich and Poor, Proud and Humble in Luke-Acts." In The Social World of the First Christians: Essays in Honor of Wayne A. Meeks, ed. L. Michael White and O. Larry Yarbrough, 214-33. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995.
Cassidy, Richard J. Jesus, Politics and Society: A Study of Luke's Gospel. New York: Orbis, 1978.
Donahue, John R. "Two Decades of Research on the Rich and the Poor in Luke-Acts." In Justice and the Holy: Essays in Honor of Walter Harrelson, ed. Douglas A. Knight and Peter J. Paris, 129-44. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.
Esler, Philip F. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology. Sheffield New Testament Studies Monograph Series, no. 57. Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 1987.
Gillman, John. Possessions and the Life of Faith: A Reading of Luke-Acts. Collegeville: Michael Glazier, 1991.
Hamm, Dennis. "Zacchaeus Revisited Once More: A Story of Vindication or Conversion?" Biblica 72 (1991): 249-52.
Heard, Warren. "Luke's Attitude Toward the Rich and the Poor." Trinity Journal 9 (1988): 47-80.
Holgate, David A. Prodigality, Liberality and Meanness. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement, no. 187. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999.
Ireland, Dennis J. Stewardship and the Kingdom of God: An Historical, Exegetical, and Contextual Study of the Parable of the Unjust Steward in Luke 16:1-13. Novum Testamentum Supplement, no. 70. Leiden: Brill, 1992.
Johnson, Luke Timothy. The Literary Function of Possessions in Luke-Acts. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series, no. 39. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977.
________. Sharing Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.
Karris, Robert J. "Poor and Rich: The Lukan Sitz im Leben." In Perspectives on Luke-Acts, ed. Charles H. Talbert, 112-25. Danville: Association of Baptist Professors of Religion, 1978.
Kim, Kyoung-Jin. Stewardship and Almsgiving in Luke’s Theology. Journal for the Study
of the New Testament Supplement, no. 155. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.
Koenig, John. New Testament Hospitality. Overtures to Biblical Theology. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1988.
Kraybill, Donald B. and Dennis M. Sweetland. "Possessions in Luke-Acts: A Sociological Perspective." Perspectives in Religious Studies 10 (1983): 215-39.
Liu, Peter. "Did the Lucan Jesus Desire Voluntary Poverty of His Followers?" Evangelical Quarterly 64 (1992): 291-317.
Mealand, David L. Poverty and Expectation in the Gospels. London: SPCK, 1980.
Moxnes, Halvor. The Economy of the Kingdom: Social Conflict and Economic Relations in the Luke's Gospel. Overtures to Biblical Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988.
Pilgrim, Walter E. Good News to the Poor. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1981.
Schottroff, Luise and Wolfgang Stegemann. Jesus and the Hope of the Poor, tr. Matthew
J. O’Connell. New York: Orbis, 1986.
Schmidt, Thomas E. Hostility to Wealth in the Synoptics. Journal for the Study of the
New Testament Supplement, no. 15. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987.
Seccombe, David P. Possessions and the Poor in Luke-Acts. Linz: A Fuchs, 1982.
Theissen, Gerd. Sociology of Early Palestinian Christianity, tr. John Bowden.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978.
Wright, Addison G. "The Widow's Mites: Praise or Lament?--A Matter of Context." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44 (1982): 256-65.
York, John O. The Last Shall Be First: The Rhetoric of Reversal in Luke. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series, no. 46. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.