The Unjust Steward: An Exposition on Luke 16:1-13

by

Introduction

The book of Luke provides gentile believers certainty concerning the nature of salvation through Christ. A correct perception of Luke’s purpose enables a clear understanding of its role in conveying its narrative. This understanding is imperative when regarding Christ’s announcement, birth and appearance, ministry and service, instruction and submission and about conquering and commission.[1] Having an understanding of Luke’s overall purpose is vital to providing clarity about the book’s theme and structure.

This gives the reader a fuller understanding when approaching the parable concerning, for example, the Unjust Steward.[2] This particular parable concerns a dishonest money manager that becomes labeled a wise and faithful servant after using material wealth in an effort to gain eternal treasure. The reader is able to see that Jesus is telling a parable of two individuals that are using the rules of the sinful world to get the best of one another. This only becomes clear when the parable is kept within its proper context about “the consciousness of the end – which implies accountability.”[3] Yet, most commentators seem to agree that this parable is one of the most difficult to interpret since it goes against the grain.[4]

The Unjust Steward parable does not go against the mold of righteous narratives about good people that should be imitated since many commentators have simply over analyzed the parable to defend Christ’s words.  The purpose of many of the parables is to give individuals examples of people to imitate themselves after, which includes those of the Sower, the Prodigal Son, the Good Shepherd, and the Lost Coin.[5] Then there are others who speak of people that are not admirable, for example, a fool who seeks to ensure his future by building bigger barns. In comparison to these examples, the Unjust Steward parable goes further by conveying a narrative of a man that undoubtedly has a wicked heart. Yet, the apparent unjust steward is commended as a man of wisdom.

Keys to Interpretation

 There are several specific keys to interpretation that aid an individual to understands this parable. First, readers must not linger on the steward’s commendation and must focus their attention on the parables significance in Christ’s ministry. Additionally, readers must remember that it was part of Christ’s mission to illustrate the stark differences between evil’s control of our world and the coming kingdom of God. Thereafter, readers must remember that the parable is placed behind a narrative that is focused on God’s given forgiveness and grace. Hence, the purpose to convey that humanity’s attention cannot be halfhearted. The parable “has no edifying moral lesson [since] it’s a story about the improbability of grace.”[6] It is a conscious decision to ignore God to follow the rules of this world to prosper now or accept God’s grace and follow His eternal law to prosper eternally.

 

Historical Context

In various sections of Amos, particularly chapter 8, the prophet is indignant about practices that take advantage of the poor; the rich violate the religious law to gain time for dishonest practices that result in people being sent into slavery.[7] Nevertheless, commentators have found it difficult to agree on the Unjust Steward parable as it “seems to condone the very kind of skullduggery against [which] Amos rants.”[8] Commentators have actually made the parable difficult when it is not. There is contextual information within the parable and historical background that aid the proper interpretation of the passage.

The commercial practices of the parables time period aids in interpretation when taken into consideration. This is clearly illustrated with the Jews being prohibited to charge interest upon loans they have given to fellow Jews.[9] Thus, those that desire to make a return on given loans evade this law with the reasoning that the law’s concern was with barring the exploitation of the poor.[10] However, the law “was not meant to forbid innocent transactions that were mutually beneficial and where the payment of interest amounted to the sharing of profits.”[11] Furthermore, those that had commodities were not considered poor; therefore lending to them was not considered exploitation. Consequently, it was possible to use legal fiction as a basis to charge interest since it was common for many to have possession of some oil or wheat. The loaned amount was given value in relation to wheat, oil, the addition of interest, and the bond concerning repayment to be paid in oil or wheat. These types of transactions were done by stewards and generally transpired without the owner being aware.

This cultural background gives us an understanding of how the steward dealt with transactions on behalf of his client. Eugene Peterson stated “that the [steward] is a rental estate manager and the debtors are farmers who pay their rent in kind (oil and wheat are mentioned).”[12]

The Steward: A Money Manager (vv. 1 – 2)

The steward is a professional money manager who is hired to direct the business affairs of a rich man.[13] The nature of the manager’s duties gave him the ability to be careless and misappropriate money for his own benefit.[14] The rich man heard legitimate rumors of the manager wastefully (the verb “wasting” is also used in verses 15:13 and 16:11) using his goods. Therefore, the rich man made known his intention to fire the manager upon demanding the full accounting of the losses, which also implied the rich man’s intention to seek restitution through legal or direct means.[15]

The Manager’s Best Options (vv. 3 – 7)

The rich man’s instructions gave the manager time to develop a way to resolve the issue at hand. He understood that the rich man was not aware of all the losses and that a full accounting would reveal his own improper management. In an effort to resolve the issue, the steward contemplated begging only to decide that he could not because he found it to be shameful. To avoid being fired and taken to court, he developed a plan to lower the losses to the rich man’s account which would leave him with a smaller restitution to pay. Moreover, such a plan gave him the opportunity to reform his bad reputation within the community by obtaining favor with those he had dealt with.

The manager’s plan entailed accepting reduced payments from those that had outstanding debts. The settlement of the first account at half of what was owed likely occurred due to the particular mans ability to pay that sum immediately.[16] A second example was given where a man was allowed to replace one hundred measures of wheat with eighty: “The measure here is the koros, about 10 bushels, making the total approximately 1,000 bushels.”[17] It is apparent that large quantities were involved in these transactions. Furthermore, the involvement of various commodities resulted in the steward varying the discount he gave.[18]

                   The Manager’s Unrighteous Brilliance (vv. 8 – 9)

 The plan that the manager deployed was considered smart according to the wisdom of the world. This is confirmed through the rich man making it known that he believed that to be the case. It is believed that Jesus gave praise bestowed upon the manager. This is actually not the case as Jesus actually called him unrighteous. This occurred by Jesus offering the praise bestowed on the manager through the mouth of the rich man.[19] The rich man’s verbal support of the manager’s actions leaves us to believe that both men were similarly unrighteous in their activities.

The parables concluding verses do not tell a narrative regarding business, but one about the focus of an individual’s life. The parable concerns a decision between being controlled by evil in our lives and having a desire for the kingdom of God. This either results in those that live according to the world following the world’s standards or those living for the kingdom of God following the standards of God.[20] The way that individuals decide to live determines how their mammon (“wealth”) will be used. Those that live according to the world will use their wealth for selfish gain while those living according to the standards of God will use their wealth in an unselfish fashion for God’s gain.

The use of true mammon or false mammon may imply that there is commonly some element of unrighteousness in the way people acquire possessions. As a result, “Jesus’ followers must use their money for their spiritual purposes just as wisely as the children of the world do or their material aims.”[21] It is the aim of Christ’s followers to store up their eternal treasures (“wealth”) in heaven (not in this world) where they will last forever.[22] This accomplishment will enable us to develop lives that will not be based on material possessions that can be easily lost and will not bring forth friendships that will not stay faithful in tough times.[23] Having such a focus does not leave us poor or friendless, but will actually leave us with greater wealth and stronger friendships that we could ever imagine.

The Coming Kingdom (vv. 10 – 12)

This passage concludes with Jesus articulating that an individual cannot serve God and money at the same time. The use of “wealth” and “money” in the passage is a figure of speech that conveys a parallel meaning through an associated label.[24] This segment of the passage delves into making the point that what people do with the small things in their lives will be what they do with the larger things.[25]Charles Swindall echoed this point stating: “[i]n accordance with the principle laid down in [verse 10] anyone who uses money in the wrong way shows himself unfitted to handle more important things.”[26] This idea is taken a step further when we consider that everything in our possession is not ours but His in the first place[27] and that we are nothing more than God’s own stewards (“managers”) in this world.

Service to God and Money (v. 13)

 Thus, those who are not faithful in the little things in their own lives are not fit to handle the things that belong to God. The term used (“mammon” for money and wealth) symbolizes the methods and values associated with the world.[28] Money in itself is not inherently evil or able to control an individual’s actions. This passages usage of “mammon” is referring to an individual’s devotion to serve money over God. In short, the parable conveys that when evil reigns, everything in this world becomes acceptable for an individual to do when attempting to achieve their goal or goals. As a result, an individual must choose to serve money or God.

 Theological Concerns

Though there are undertones that address the Pharisees, the parable is primarily for the benefit of the disciples.[29] As a result, it is important to understand the use of “unrighteousness” to be aware of this passages appropriate context. Therefore, it is important to understand the term within its proper context, which is concerning worldly “mammon” (material greed or wealth). However, Jesus is not making this reference to convey that the disciples should unjustly gain wealth to only be generous with the obtained wealth.

Given this, His use of unrighteous could refer to several plausible explanations. It is possible that the reference is in regards to the means of acquiring material wealth or the way that an individual desires to use the material wealth. Although these explanations are possible, the most probable explanation that fits into Christ’s usage of the term is that wealth can have a corrupting influence that can cause individuals to do unrighteous actions. Hence, Paul’s warns that “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.”[30]

Application

This particular parables purpose, considering the principle being illustrated, is concerning the difference between an unjust steward and a just steward. This is taking into account that the unjust steward is considering his “clients” resources as a means to providing for his own personal pleasure and advancement within the community. Therefore, taking this into consideration, Christians can perceive two lessons that can be applied in their lives.

Righteous Stewards

The parables conclusion[31] is concerning Christ’s desire for His disciples to appropriately model their lives to only look to Him as their only master as righteous stewards. Living this way results causes a Christian to see all their possessions as given as a gift from God. In addition, such a lifestyle also causes Christians to realize that they act as Christ’s stewards in this world to appropriately use His resources to advance the Fathers goal or goals.

The key to being a righteous steward is accomplished by acting as an individual that is not self-centered (“egocentric”) and places God as the focal point in every aspect their own life (“theocentric”). Therefore, a theocentric steward is an individual that has a greater love for God than for the resources they have been blessed with.[32] Such a theocentric love results in Christians having intent to use their blessings for the explicit benefit of other people. In short, those that genuinely love Him will passionately give of their blessings to fulfill His desires.

Faithfulness in What You Have

The principle of faithfulness[33] is further developed in the parables closing verses.[34] Jesus explains that an individual who is faithful in little will then be faithful in much. Likewise, an individual that is dishonest in little will then be dishonest in much. This explanation makes the point that an individual who cannot be faithful with wealth on earth cannot be entrusted with “true riches.”[35] The use of “true riches” in verse 11 is a reference to our stewardship and responsibility in the kingdom of God alongside all the heavenly rewards.

This reaction to wealth will occur when an individual has sincerely placed their faith in Christ. The Apostle Paul declared that the Spirit lives within each Christian and that His life is reproduced in us.[36] The whole purpose of the Christian walk was summed up well by Paul: “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”[37] Therefore, our “flesh” has been crucified with Christ and it no longer has the right to continue on living.

It must be clarified that the crucifixion of the flesh is not done through our own abilities or power. Paul stated that no such thing is even needed as Christ’s work on the cross resulted in our complete reconciliation with God.[38]  Paul contends in Colossians 2 that a man oriented philosophy is false due to it not being based on the love of wisdom.  This view was articulated due to Paul’s belief that a man centered philosophy does not originate from God. In addition, he contends that their beliefs came from the tradition of men that included the practice of following rituals and religious days,[39] and the pursuit of visions and experiences.[40] There are many within the Christian circles that are currently attempting to accomplish righteousness through similar actions counter to Paul’s teaching.[41]

There is no need for Christians to follow a man centered philosophy as a result of their faith in Him has resulted in them receiving the fullness of Christ in their lives.[42] As a result, there is no need for disciples to follow the “traditions” in their own power to become a righteous person since the works of the flesh have been replaced by Christ. In short, the Christian is to have a dependence upon Christ to live within them and have a willingness to allow the Spirit to transform them according to His desires.[43]

          [1] Luke 1-4:14; Luke 4:14-9:50; Luke 9:51-19:27; Luke 19:28-24:53.

[2] Luke 16:1-13

[3] Douglas John Hall, The Steward: A Biblical Symbol Come to Age (Grand Rapida: Eerdmans, 1990), 48.

 [4] Cf. Leon Morris, The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Luke (Downers Grover: IVP Academic, 1988), 268; Justo Gonzelez, Belief A Theological Commentary on the Bible: Luke (Louisville:  Westminster John Knox Press, 2010), 190; Charles Swindoll, Swindoll’s New Testament Insights: Insights on Luke (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 390; Dave Matthews, “The Parable of the Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-13): A Reexamination of the Traditional View in Light of Recent Challenges,” JETS 38 (March 1995), 29 – 39.

           [5] Luke 8:1-15; Luke 15:11-32; John 10:1-30; Luke 15:8-10.

 [6] Eugene Peterson, “Gospel Rascals,” Christian Century (2008): 30.

 [7] John Donahue, “Balancing the Books,” Twenty-Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time (2001): 185.

 [8] Ibid.

 [9] Leon Morris, The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Luke (Downers Grover: IVP Academic, 1988), 269; Exodus 22:25; Leviticus 25:36; Deuteronomy 23:19.

 [10] Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 269.

 [11] Ibid.

           [12] Eugene Peterson, “Gospel Rascals,” 32.

           [13] Swindoll, New Testament Insights, 290.

           [14] Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 270.

 [15] Cf. Swindoll, New Testament Insights, 291; Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 270.

           [16] Swindoll, New Testament Insights, 391.

           [17] Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 271.

           [18] Ibid.

           [19] Swindoll, New Testament Insights, 291.

           [20] Ibid., 292.

           [21] Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 272.

           [22] Matthew 6:19-20

           [23] Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 272.

           [24] Swindoll, New Testament Insights, 293.

           [25] Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 273.

           [26] Ibid.

 [27] 1 Chronicles 29:14-16

           [28] Swindoll, New Testament Insights, 293.

           [29] Luke 16:1

[30] 1 Timothy 6:10

           [31] Luke 16:10-13

[32] Frederick J. Streets, “Accountability,” The Christian Century (1993): 110.

           [33] Luke 16:9

           [34] Luke 16:10-13

           [35] Luke 16:13

           [36] Galatians 5-6

           [37] Galatians 2:20

           [38] Colossians 1:20; 2:11

           [39] Colossians 2:16-17

           [40] Colossians 2:18-19

           [41] Colossians 2:20-23

           [42] Colossians 2:10

[43] Galatians 5:22-23

Related articles

Charles Spurgeon: “Many Are They That Rise Up Against Me.” (Exposition Psalm 3:1-2)

by

The following is C.H. Spurgeons verse by verse exposition of Psalm 3:1-2 that is originally from his weekly series entitled The Treasury of David.

I have preceded each verse exposition by adding the appropriate verse.

The preceding expositions from Spurgeon on the Psalms can be found under the “Category” entitled the Treasury of David.

Verse 1: ”O Lord, how many are my foes! Many are rising against me;”

The poor broken hearted father complains of the multitude of his enemies: and if you turn to 2 Samuel 15:12 , you will find it written that “the conspiracy was strong; for the people increased continually with Absalom,” while the troops of David constantly diminished!

Lord how are they increased that trouble me! Here is a note of exclamation to express the wonder of woe which amazed and perplexed the fugitive father. Alas! I see no limit to my misery, for my troubles are enlarged! There was enough at first to sink me very low; but lo! my enemies multiply. When Absalom, my darling, is in rebellion against me, it is enough to break my heart; but lo! Ahithophel hath forsaken me, my faithful counsellors have turned their backs on me; lo! my generals and soldiers have deserted my standard. “How are they increased that trouble me!” Troubles always come in flocks. Sorrow hath a numerous family.

Many are they that rise up against me. Their hosts are far superior to mine! Their numbers are too great for my reckoning!

Let us here recall to our memory the innumerable host which beset our Divine Redeemer. The legions of our sins, the armies of fiends, the crowd of bodily pains, the host of spiritual sorrows, and all the allies of death and hell, set themselves in battle against the Son of Man. O how precious to know and believe that he has routed their hosts, and trodden them down in his anger! They who would have troubled us he has removed into captivity, and those who would have risen up against us he has laid low. The dragon lost his sting when he dashed it into the soul of Jesus.

Verse 2: “many are saying of my soul, there is no salvation for him in God. Selah“

David complains before his loving God of the worst weapon of his enemies’ attacks, and the bitterest drop of his distresses. “Oh!” saith David, many there be that say of my soul, There is no help for him in God. Some of his distrustful friends said this sorrowfully, but his enemies exultingly boasted of it, and longed to see their words proved by his total destruction. This was the most unkind cut of all, when they declared that his God had forsaken him. Yet David knew in his own conscience that he had given them some ground for this exclamation, for he had committed sin against God in the very light of day. Then they flung his crime with Bathsheba into his face, and they said, “Go up, thou bloody man; God hath forsaken thee and left thee.” Shimei cursed him, and swore at him to his very face, for he was bold because of his backers, since multitudes of the men of Belial thought of David in like fashion. Doubtless, David felt this infernal suggestion to be staggering to his faith. If all the trials which come from heaven, all the temptations which ascend from hell, and all the crosses which arise from earth, could be mixed and pressed together, they would not make a trial so terrible as that which is contained in this verse. It is the most bitter of all afflictions to be led to fear that there is no help for us in God. And yet remember our most blessed Saviour had to endure this in the deepest degree when he cried, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” He knew full well what is was to walk in darkness and to see no light. This was the curse of the curse. This was the wormwood mingled with the gall. To be deserted of his Father was worse than to be the despised of men. Surely we should love him who suffered this bitterest of temptations and trials for our sake. It will be a delightful and instructive exercise for the loving heart to mark the Lord in his agonies as here pourtrayed, for there is here, and in very many other Psalms, far more of David’s Lord than of David himself.

Selah.

This is a musical pause; the precise meaning of which is not known. Some think it simply a rest, a pause in the music; others say it means, “Lift up the strain — sing more loudly — pitch the tune upon a higher key — there is nobler matter to come, therefore retune your harps.” Harp strings soon get out of order and need to be screwed up again to their proper tightness, and certainly our heart strings are evermore getting out of tune, Let “Selah” teach us to pray

“O may my heart in tune be found Like David’s harp of solemn sound.”

At least we may learn that wherever we see “Selah,” we should look upon it as a note of observation. Let us read the passage which precedes and succeeds it with greater earnestness, for surely there is always something excellent where we are required to rest and pause and meditate, or when we are required to lift up our hearts in grateful song. “SELAH.”

He Is Risen

by

Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. See, I have told you.” So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him. Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”

Matthew 28:1 – 10 (ESV)

Love of God

Charles Spurgeon: “It is an awful thing to perish in the midst of sin, in the very way of rebellion.” (Exposition Psalm 2:10-12)

by

The following is C.H. Spurgeons verse by verse exposition of Psalm 2:7-9 that is originally from his weekly series entitled The Treasury of David.

I have preceded each verse exposition by adding the appropriate verse.

The preceding expositions from Spurgeon on the Psalms can be found under “Category” titled the Treasury of David.

CH Spurgeon

Verse 10. “Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth.”

The scene again changes, and counsel is given to those who have taken counsel to rebel. They are exhorted to obey, and give the kiss of homage and affection to him whom they have hated.

Be wise. — It is always wise to be willing to be instructed, especially when such instruction tends to the salvation of the soul. “Be wise now, therefore;” delay no longer, but let good reason weigh with you. Your warfare cannot succeed, therefore desist and yield cheerfully to him who will make you bow if you refuse his yoke. O how wise, how infinitely wise is obedience to Jesus, and how dreadful is the folly of those who continue to be his enemies!

Verse 11. “Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.”

Serve the Lord with fear; let reverence and humility be mingled with your service. He is a great God, and ye are but puny creatures; bend ye, therefore, in lowly worship, and let a filial fear mingle with all your obedience to the great Father of the Ages.

Rejoice with trembling — There must ever be a holy fear mixed with the Christian’s joy. This is a sacred compound, yielding a sweet smell, and we must see to it that we burn no other upon the altar. Fear, without joy, is torment; and joy, without holy fear, would be presumption.

Verse 12. “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.”

Mark the solemn argument for reconciliation and obedience. It is an awful thing to perish in the midst of sin, in the very way of rebellion; and yet how easily could his wrath destroy us suddenly. It needs not that his anger should be heated seven times hotter; let the fuel kindle but a little, and we are consumed. O sinner! Take heed of the terrors of the Lord; for “our God is a consuming fire.” Note the benediction with which the Psalm closes: –

Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. Have we a share in this blessedness? Do we trust in him? Our faith may be slender as a spider’s thread; but if it be real, we are in our measure blessed. The more we trust, the more fully shall we know this blessedness. We may therefore close the Psalm with the prayer of the apostles: — “Lord, increase our faith.”

The first Psalm was a contrast between the righteous man and the sinner; the second Psalm is a contrast between the tumultuous disobedience of the ungodly world and the sure exaltation of the righteous Son of God. In the first Psalm, we saw the wicked driven away like chaff; in the second Psalm we see them broken in pieces like a potter’s vessel. In the first Psalm, we beheld the righteous like a tree planted by the rivers of water; and here, we contemplate Christ the Covenant Head of the righteous, made better than a tree planted by the rivers of water, for he is made king of all the islands, and all the heathen bow before him and kiss the dust; while he himself gives a blessing to all those who put their trust in him. The two Psalms are worthy of the very deepest attention; they are, in fact, the preface to the entire Book of Psalms, and were by some of the ancients, joined into one. They are, however, two Psalms; for Paul speaks of this as the second Psalm. ( Acts 13:33 .) The first shows us the character and lot of the righteous; and the next teaches us that the Psalms are Messianic, and speak of Christ the Messiah — the Prince who shall reign from the river even unto the ends of the earth. That they have both a far reaching prophetic outlook we are well assured, but we do not feel competent to open up that matter, and must leave it to abler hands.

 

Charles Spurgeon: “Jehovah hath given to his Anointed” (Exposition on Psalm 2:7-9).

by

The following is C.H. Spurgeons verse by verse exposition of Psalm 2:7-9 that is originally from his weekly series entitled The Treasury of David.

I have preceded each verse exposition by adding the appropriate verse.

The preceding expositions from Spurgeon on the Psalms can be found under “Category” titled the Treasury of David.Image

Verse 7: “I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you.’”

This Psalm wears something of a dramatic form, for now another person is introduced as speaking. We have looked into the council chamber of the wicked, and to the throne of God, and now we behold the Anointed declaring his rights of sovereignty, and warning the traitors of their doom.

 

God has laughed at the counsel and ravings of the wicked, and now Christ the Anointed himself comes forward, as the Risen Redeemer, “declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” Romans 1:4 . Looking into the angry faces of the rebellious kings, the Anointed One seems to say, “If this sufficeth not to make you silent.”

 

I will declare the decree. Now this decree is directly in conflict with the device of man, for its tenour is the establishment of the very dominion against which the nations are raving.

 

Thou art my Son. Here is a noble proof of the glorious Divinity of our Immanuel. “For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?” What a mercy to have a Divine Redeemer in whom to rest our confidence!

 

This day have I begotten thee. If this refers to the Godhead of our Lord, let us not attempt to fathom it, for it is a great truth, a truth reverently to be received, but not irreverently to be scanned. It may be added, that if this relates to the Begotten One in his human nature, we must here also rejoice in the mystery, but not attempt to violate its sanctity by intrusive prying into the secrets of the Eternal God. The things which are revealed are enough, without venturing into vain speculations. In attempting to define the Trinity, or unveil the essence of Divinity, many men have lost themselves: here great ships have foundered. What have we to do in such a sea with our frail skiffs?

Verse 8: ”‘Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.’”

Ask of me. It was a custom among great kings, to give to favoured ones whatever they might ask. ( Esther 5:6 Matthew 14:7 .) So Jesus hath but to ask and have. Here he declares that his very enemies are his inheritance. To their face he declares this decree, and “Lo! here”, cries the Anointed One, as he holds aloft in that once pierced hand the sceptre of his power, “He hath given me this, not only the right to be a king, but the power to conquer.”

Verse 9: ‘”You shall break them with a rod of iron and dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.’”

Yes! Jehovah hath given to his Anointed a rod of iron with which he shall break rebellious nations in pieces, and, despite their imperial strength, they shall be but as potters’ vessels, easily dashed into shivers, when the rod of iron is in the hand of the omnipotent Son of God. Those who will not bend must break. Potters’ vessels are not to be restored if dashed in pieces, and the ruin of sinners will be hopeless if Jesus shall smite them.

“Ye sinners seek his grace, Whose wrath ye cannot bear;
Fly to the shelter of his cross, And find salvation there.”

He Is My Security: Charles Spurgeon on Psalm 2:4-6

by

ImageThe following is C.H. Spurgeons verse by verse exposition of Psalm 2:4-6 that is originally from his weekly series entitled The Treasury of David. I have preceded each verse exposition by adding the appropriate verse. The preceding exposition on the Psalms from Spurgeon can be found under “Category” titled the Treasury of David.

Verse 4: “He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord holds them in derision (ESV).”

Let us now turn our eyes from the wicked counsel chamber and raging tumult of man, to the secret place of the majesty of the Most High. What doth God say? What will the King do unto the men who reject his only begotten Son, the Heir of all things?

Mark the quiet dignity of the Omnipotent One, and the contempt which he pours upon the princes and their raging people. He has not taken the trouble to rise up and do battle with them — he despises them, he knows how absurd, how irrational, how futile are their attempts against him — he therefore laughs at them.

Verse 5: “Then he will speak to them in his wrath, and terrify them in his fury… (ESV).”

After he has laughed he shall speak; he needs not smite; the breath of his lips is enough. At the moment when their power is at its height, and their fury most violent, then shall his Word go forth against them. And what is it that he says? — it is a very galling sentence –

Yet, says he, “despite your malice, despite your tumultuous gatherings, despite the wisdom of your counsels, despite the craft of your lawgivers, yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.” Is not that a grand exclamation! He has already done that which the enemy seeks to prevent. While they are proposing, he has disposed the matter. Jehovah’s will is done, and man’s will frets and raves in vain. God’s Anointed is appointed, and shall not be disappointed. Look back through all the ages of infidelity, hearken to the high and hard things which men have spoken against the Most High, listen to the rolling thunder of earth’s volleys against the Majesty of heaven, and then think that God is saying all the while, “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.”

Verse 6: “As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill.”

Yet Jesus reigns, yet he sees the travail of his soul, and “his unsuffering kingdom yet shall come” when he shall take unto himself his great power, and reign from the river unto the ends of the earth. Even now he reigns in Zion, and our glad lips sound forth the praises of the Prince of Peace. Greater conflicts may here be foretold, but we may be confident that victory will be given to our Lord and King. Glorious triumphs are yet to come; hasten them, we pray thee, O Lord! It is Zion’s glory and joy that her King is in her, guarding her from foes, and filling her with good things. Jesus sits upon the throne of grace, and the throne of power in the midst of his church. In him is Zion’s best safeguard; let her citizens be glad in him.

“Thy walls are strength, and at thy gates
A guard of heavenly warriors waits;
Nor shall thy deep foundations move,
Fixed on his counsels and his love.
Thy foes in vain designs engage;
Against his throne in vain they rage,
Like rising waves, with angry roar,
That dash and die upon the shore.”

The Linchpin To The Mongolian Empire: Conclusion (Part 6)

by

The linchpin of the Mongols desires was their quest for wealth. But they understood the benefits of long-term stability. As a result, the Mongols under Chinggis Khan and his immediate successors realized that they did not have the administrative experience to rule a state. Therefore, “it was not long before they took the line of least resistance and adopted, in the various parts of their empire, a more developed religion learned from their conquered subjects.”(56) The purpose of this action was to use religion as a syncretic tool to reach their goals in any specific region. Therefore, the Mongols incorporated numerous policies that encouraged the acceptance of different religions, which enabled the development of political, cultural, and economic expansion. This occurring in a syncretic process was the Mongols linchpin to obtaining economic wealth in the long-term. Thus, they had interest in developing long-term relationship to develop trade networks. As a result, the early Mongol rulers understood they had to develop the necessary skills to create and manage a state.

Chinggis Khan and immediate his successors understood that the Mongols did not have the necessary skills to create and manage a state, with all the institutions and bureaucracy needed to run an empire, from the tribal heritage. Consequently, once the Mongols conquered a region they permitted the regions ruler to keep his position. However, the ruler had to align themselves with the Mongols and their interests. There is little known about why the rulers cooperated with the Mongols. But, perhaps, it comes down to rulers being able to maintain their regional authority and the possible economic prosperity. The Mongols undertook this approach because
they wanted to retain people who had the administrative skills they desired. Having people in place with the administrative skills and familiarity with the region-helped keep it under stable control. The regions stability after conquest is vital because it permitted the Mongols not to retain a significant military force there. Therefore, allowing them to focus on further conquest. Conversely, in order for the Mongols to continue their conquest they had to rely on expansion policies.

The Mongols relied upon political, cultural, economic, and religious expansion to supply the necessary resources needed to establish and maintain their state. The most common method of presenting expansion is the extension of political control. In the early regions, their methods of political control relied upon their violent aggressive military force. In short, the Mongols maintained control through brute force and fear, but they realized that further conquest required change. Consequently, the Mongols understood that it benefited them to alter their administrative methods. Cultural expansion must occur to accomplish this. The continuance of expansion is vital to the Mongols, as conquest was the linchpin to the economic benefits that they desired. The expansion of cultural beliefs and the acceptance of the conquered regions religion is the centerpiece to economic expansion. Nevertheless, the linchpin to the Mongols establishing and maintaining the empire is their acceptance that their shamanistic beliefs did not provide spiritual unity required within the conquered regions. Therefore, their willingness to adopt a specific regions religion was the linchpin to the various expansion methods and reforms the Mongols undertook.

The resources used influenced the Mongols policy toward religion and the state. Although there is a good deal of information provided on the religious ceremonies and references within The Secret History but there is little available on religion itself. Nevertheless, it is
understood that Chinggis Khan and immediate successors permitted Eternal Blue Heaven to dictate their actions above their own actions.(57) The Mongols believed that this willingness to submit to the greater power gave them the authority to rule and strength necessary to conquer other regions. In addition, they had a strong belief that the Eternal Blue Heaven not only had the ability to give them authority and strength but to take it away as well. Consequently, the first few rulers of the Mongol Empire understood they must stay in Eternal Blue Heavens good graces. This could only occur as long as they do not have internal family fighting if they expected to
sustain the strength and military activity. However, their religious convictions did not create the ability for the cultural exchange necessary to permit the long distance trade the Mongols sought.

The preeminent solution to enable the cultural exchange and development of economic trade is the ability to voluntary convert peoples to the state religion. It is vital for voluntary conversion because the world religions – Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam – did not accept forced conversion. Therefore, the state levied numerous restrictions upon individuals who did not adhere to the state religion. Individuals had the right to retain their traditional religion but faced economic hardships for their decision. Despite the possible exemption from the levied poll taxes, non-adherents often chose to maintain their traditional faiths. However, this policy did encourage numerous people to voluntary convert because of their non-commitment to their faith. The conversion of the population became vital to the legitimization of the ruling group. However, this is only a piece of the overarching purpose of religion. Religion is the linchpin to the cultural changes that led to the ruling elite’s realization of the political possibilities that religion provided. It not only provided a source of legitimization but also helped bring about the cultural unification of the numerous people and cultures.(58) The cultural exchange enabled foreign merchants to regularly to adopt and practice regions religion until they renounced it upon leaving the region. The Mongol policy on religion changed once the empire broke up.

The policy on religion changed with the breakup of the Mongol Empire. Religion continued to play a role between different cultures. However, the Mongols departed from using it as a linchpin for political, cultural, and economic expansion because they were no longer
interested in the long-term economic structure of the empire. Thus, the Mongol Khanates ended the political, cultural, economic policies that built and maintained the stability of the empire. Consequently, the Mongols systematically destroyed and plundered numerous towns with no regard to religious beliefs or practices. Furthermore, it became common for the Khanates to destroy regions with no regard to the long-term side affects that would occur. Thus, the later generations of Mongol rulers destroyed the support the empire developed. This resulted from their short-term interests in wealth over the long-term survival rate of the empire. The short-term interests displayed the opposite traits that led to the rise of the Mongol Empire to power.

The Mongol empire rose to power due to the syncretic process that incorporated strong policies in the political, social, and economic incentives intertwined with the religious belief and cultural traditions.(59) The intertwinement of these factors enabled the Mongol empire to reach its peak of power. The fall of the empire began to occur when the descendants of Chinggis Khan strayed from holding true to the syncretic process he implemented. This process is the linchpin to the rise and fall of the Mongol empire because “it provided opportunities for established beliefs, values, and customs to find a place within the framework of different cultural traditions to win popular support in foreign lands.”(60) In short, Chinggis Khan understood the shortcomings of the Mongolian tribes. In addition, he understood that if he promoted a state that embraced the different religions and cultures of foreign lands enabled him to gain power and wealth for his family. As a result, in the late thirteenth century at the height of the Mongol Empire, they controlled and ruled the second biggest contiguous landmass by a single emperor throughout history. (61)

End Notes

56 Morgan, The Mongols, 41.

57 Anonymous, Secret History, 170.

58 Ibid., 83.

59 Bentley, Old World Encounters, viii.

60 Ibid.

61 Thomas J. Craughwell, The Rise and Fall of the Second Largest Empire in History (Beverly: Fairwinds 61 Press, 2010), 9.

Related Articles