What if we got a parable the wrong way round, what if we got the point wrong – what would be the consequences? What we got so used to reading parables starting “the Kingdom of God is like…”, that we start to project that phase on to every parable. What if the parable actually was preceded by a comment like this:
“he [Jesus] went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once.”
This is from Luke 19 – verse 11. Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem, and hes gathering lots of interest people are getting excited because they are convinced that the Kingdom will come in a cataclysmic way. Already the dead are being raised (Lazarus) and more recently, wealth is being redistributed by the exploiters (Zacchaeus). Jesus has already explained to his disciples that whats coming up won’t be what they expect, in fact he is going to die, but they don’t understand it.
The Zacchaeus passage immediately before verse 11 is pertinent. Zacchaeus is redistributing wealth as his response to Jesus, and living out the justice expressed by the Hebrew prophets of the past. People are excited – surely this is the Kingdom come! In fact his parable is being told in Zacchaeus’ house. Zacchaeus is par of the corrupt system, if he’s bailing out there will be consequences. Jesus tells them a parable – and it has resonances with the 1st century event (documented by the 1st Century historian Josephus) of Herod, “a man of noble birth”, traveling to Rome (“a distant country”) to “have himself appointed king”. Just in case there’s any doubt Herod isn’t a good guy, ad the local Jews didn’t like him and didn’t ‘want this man to be our king.’ … So lets hear the parable:
“A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas. ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
“But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
“He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
“The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
” ‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
“The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
“His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
“Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
“His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
“Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
” ‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
“He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.”
Here’s some further thoughts:
First, remember the noble man, who wants to be king is Herod (he’s a bad man getting riches and power at others expense)
Second, you don’t make returns like that on money with out some sort of exploitation.
Third, “the cloth” that the last servant uses is, in the original language, a sort of “snot rag”. Could it be that this servant is saying – ‘this is dirty money and dirty work, I’m not having anything to do with it, I won’t play in this system’?
Fourth, what happens to those who won’t play in this harsh unjust economic system? They’ll be killed. Be careful Zacchaeus, you can give away the tax money and that will make you great in terms of the Kingdom of God, but the current ruling powers won’t like it.
Bang!
What if our alternative reading of this parable, popularized in the era of western capitalism – in fact exposes our very un-righteousness?
Ouch!
[note]
N.T.Wrights response is, if this is the case then the story ceases to be a parable, and takes on more of the form of a moral tale. Perhaps, says Wright, Luke does work this way, but we need more work on this. It will be interesting to see how investigation of this text continues.
If you want a provocative talk about justice and here where I got these thoughts from, check out:
Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat ‘Outside of a Small Circle of Friends’: Jesus and the Justice of God
view Flash video | download MP3 audio | download MP4 video
Recent Comments