Who Is My Master?

September 21, 2025

Luke 16:1-13

            As a pastor, you know that you are in trouble when none of your commentaries agree on the meaning of a passage.  You know that you are in trouble when your commentaries are offering several different possible conflicting interpretations of the reading.  And you know that you are in trouble when your most expensive and comprehensive commentary tells you that theologians have been scratching their heads over the meaning of this week’s lesson for the last 2,000 years.

            And so, what I would like to do today is to try to explain this parable in a way that seems to be the most commonly accepted among the 8 different Luke commentaries that I am using,  and in the way that seems to make the most sense to me, with thanks to Leon Morris, a commentator that I was already a big fan of, but who really dug into this week’s reading in a way that seems to best fit both the text, and the cultural circumstances surrounding it. 

            But before we talk about the parable itself, there are a few things that we need to know.  When the manager in our parable today said that he would call “each one” of his master’s debtors, the word that we translate “each” is ἕκαστος (heck-as-toss) and in the Greek, this word is a superlative, indicating the fact that the two debtors who are the examples in this parable, are two of many, many more unmentioned debtors that this manager supervised.  This is a very large estate that we are talking about here.  Now, what the manager was managing was almost certainly rental property.  These many renters were farming land that was owned by the manager’s boss and their contracts stipulated the amount that would be paid in rent and interest as a portion of their harvest. 

            From the two examples that we are given, we find an indication of the extent of this owner’s properties.  900 gallons of olive oil represents the output of about 900 olive trees, probably occupying around 15 acres of land.  1,000 bushels of wheat is about 30 tons of wheat and represents the output of about 100 acres of farmland.  In both of these instances the manager forgives about 500 denarii of debt which in 2025 dollars is approximately $130,000.00 each.  Bearing in mind the fact that we have already established that there were significantly more than just these two debtors, the loss to this owner would have run well into the millions in today’s dollars.

            Now, this manager was said to have been wasting his master’s possessions.  And the word that we translate as “wasting” here is διασκορπίζω (dia-score-pee-zo) which is exactly the same word that was used to describe the prodigal son’s squandering of his inheritance.  This manager was NOT incompetent, he was a scoundrel who was taking advantage of his position to enrich himself.  And because his boss had discovered his malfeasance, the manager was told to bring in his books for an audit.  And the story tells us that he was going to lose his job. 

            So, given his circumstances, and the loss of his boss’s confidence in him, how could he possibly get away with altering the contracts in the way he just did, hugely reducing the debts of the renters?  Well, the manager had certain protections under Jewish law.  A manager had full authority to act on his boss’s behalf, and his boss was legally obligated to honor any contract or any agreement that the manager should happen to make.  A manager was also not permitted to be held personally responsible for any losses incurred by his actions.  And so, for better or for worse, Jewish law expressly permitted the actions that this manager took.

            We also need to know that Jewish law prohibited Jews from charging other Jews interest.  And so, for this land owner to be charging the interest that he was charging was a violation of Jewish law.  But, there’s always a loophole, right?  Morris tells us that, “Those who wished to make money from loans evaded this [law] by reasoning that the law was concerned to prohibit the exploitation of the poor.  It was not meant to forbid innocent transactions that were mutually beneficial and where the payment of interest amounted to a sharing of the profits.”  [1]  Since the renters in this case were not destitute, the land owner could tap dance his way around the law using this reasoning.  Further, the owner was protected by the fact that the manager DID have autonomy, and so if the owner was accused of charging usurious interest, he could claim ignorance of the dealings of his manager.  Given the fact that in today’s parable the interest originally charged in these contracts was somewhere on the order of 50%, I think it’s fair to say that the interest rates were indeed usurious.

            So now, facing unemployment, the manager altered the contracts to the point where it appears that he eliminated the interest entirely.  And the truly devious part of the manager’s actions is the fact that the owner couldn’t publicly complain about not being paid interest that he shouldn’t have been charging in the first place.  So are we starting to understand just how shrewd this manager really was?  I really wasn’t kidding when I said that this guy was a scoundrel.  The owner, almost certainly a savvy businessman himself, saw how his manager had painted him into a corner, and so it’s not at all hard to imagine how the owner may have shown his grudging appreciation of his manager for his actions.  But the owner also probably realized that, since he could claim that he knew nothing of the original contracts, a public commendation of his manager for changing the terms of the contracts to eliminate interest and comply with Jewish law would reflect well on his own reputation, appearing to make him a pious businessman who was obeying the law.  I guess we in the 21^st century would refer to this as writing off a public relations expense.

            Next, let’s think for a minute about those to whom Jesus told this parable.  In modern times people, not always, but often, identify with the wealthy.  We tend to view their financial success as being the result of exceptional business acumen, hard work, and persistence of effort.  And frankly, I think a lot of 21^st century people hold the idea that someday they too may be wealthy, and so they defend the wealthy, claiming them to be possessors of superior talent.  Not so Luke; his Gospel is filled with references to the evils of extreme wealth.  Luke appears to have a much better grasp of the idea that the earth holds limited resources and that the wealthy gain their wealth by taking that which does not rightly belong to them.  He understands well the fact that poverty was not a result of a lack of resources but a result of a lack of distribution.  And so, Luke would not have thought highly of the land owner in this story, and while we call the manager a scoundrel or a thief, I would imagine that Luke and many of the readers who were his contemporaries would have quietly applauded the manager for the way he flimflammed his wealthy boss.

            As for the manager, having two people in his debt for a few hundred denarii would not be anywhere near sufficient to sustain him for the rest of his life.  But we know that there were far more than two people whose contracts were reduced, and with a good number of people indebted to him he would have the option of bouncing around and sponging off of people in small amounts here and there; not enough to become a burden on anyone, but enough to get by.  And this is the point of the parable.  The manager was resourceful and he was intelligent and he didn’t let obstacles get in the way of his accomplishing his purpose of insuring the security of his own future.

            After we finish our story of the manager, Jesus begins a discussion of what the NIV calls “worldly wealth”.  But the phrase “worldly wealth” doesn’t even begin to capture the meaning of this passage.  The King James version renders this phrase as the “mammon of unrighteousness”.  And “mammon” is an English transliteration of a Greek transliteration of a Hebrew word that describes ill gotten wealth.  My interlinear Greek Bible translates this phrase as the “wealth of unrighteousness”

            So… now that we understand that “worldly wealth” means wealth that is immorally obtained, what exactly is it that Jesus is saying here?  Well, let’s contrast, as Jesus did, unrighteous mammon with righteous mammon.  Unrighteous mammon is the worldly wealth that worldly people pursue.  It is wealth that is obtained by any means necessary. And the means by which people pursue that wealth are illustrated in the devious and illicit actions of our manager today.  Unrighteous mammon is money that is used to satisfy worldly desires.  Righteous mammon, on the other hand, is the treasure that we store up in heaven.  Righteous mammon is the care that we show to those who are in need, utilizing our resources to feed the hungry, heal the sick, clothe the naked, and house the homeless.  It’s the extravagant grace that gives freely without expecting anything in return.  It’s loving God and loving neighbor and it’s living justly, loving mercy, and walking humbly with our God.

            And if we, as Christians were to pursue the mammon of righteousness with the same zeal and the same single-mindedness of purpose with which the world pursues the mammon of unrighteousness… well, just imagine what we may be able to accomplish for the kingdom.

            Strong’s tells us that every time mammon is translated as “money” or “worldly wealth” Jesus frames it as a rival master.  Mammon is a competitor for the love and devotion that we rightly owe to God.  And so, Jesus tells us that, ““No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”  Morris tells us that, “Anyone who uses money in the wrong way shows [themselves] [unfit] to handle more important things.  [So], they must not be surprised if God keeps [these things] from  them.  The same truth is put in a highly paradoxical way.  We would say that, if we are not faithful in our own things, we are not fit to handle those of others, but Jesus reverses this.  The money we think we own is not really ours.  It is always what we have from God and we are no more than stewards of it.  We cannot take it with us when we die.  If we handle it badly, we show that we are [unfit] to use the true heavenly riches which will otherwise be given us as our permanent possession.” [2]

            Our manager friend knew his way around his businesses; he had what we call street smarts.  He knew how to take every advantage of every Jewish law to insure a comfortable future for himself, and maybe even to take a little revenge on his boss who was about to fire him.  In the heat of a dire situation, he came up with a plan, and executed it flawlessly.   And the question that Jesus is asking us today is, when faced with a world that is in desperate need of hearing the Word of God, will we be able to formulate a plan on how to live up to our responsibilities to be bearers of that Word and to execute that plan flawlessly?  Are we knowledgeable enough and committed enough to take advantage of every opportunity to fill those responsibilities?  Are we willing to turn aside from the wealth of unrighteousness in order to give our entire being to the pursuit of kingdom living and the accomplishing of the goals that God sets before us?

            My dear friends, this is the path that we have chosen.  Let us use all of our available resources to touch the world with the truth of God’s love.

---

[1] Leon Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Luke, Pg.269

[2] Leon Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Luke, Pg.273

The 99 and the 1

September 14, 2025

Luke 15:1-10

The Reverend Hugh Reed once told a story about a member of his congregation who he gave the fictitious name “Allen Roberts”.  Allen was going through a difficult time in his life.  He had left home as a young man and had become ensnared in a life of drugs and homelessness.  For several years he had roamed the streets, working as a day laborer for the money he needed for drugs and a bare sustenance lifestyle.

One day, Allen was spending the night at a homeless shelter.  He was just settling into his bed, in a deep depression, and contemplating suicide when he heard someone calling “Is there an Allen Roberts here?”  Thinking at first that they must be referring to some other Allen Roberts, he ignored them, but the call came again and so, he said “I’m Allen Roberts”.  The voice told him that his mother was on the phone.  Allen replied that they must be mistaken, that HE didn’t even know where he was, how could his mother possibly know where he was.

But he answered the phone, and it was indeed his mother.  And she said to him “Allen, it’s time to come home”.  Allen told her that he didn’t even know where he was, he had no money, and besides that, she didn’t know who he was anymore and surely would not recognize him.  His mother simply replied “It’s time for you to come home.  There’s a Salvation Army officer who’s coming to you with a plane ticket.  He’s going to take you to the airport, and get you home.”

You see, every single night, for the last three years, Allen’s mother had been randomly calling hostels and homeless shelters just asking if Allen was there in the hope of maybe finding him.  She had no idea where he was, but she never gave up trying to find him until that day that she did find him.

Allen came home and with his mother’s love and support recovered from his drug addiction, was able to find meaningful work, and was baptized by the pastor that told this story.  This pastor said that, [Allen] did not find his own way to my office… A path, not of his own making, [was] made by the love that found him, that knew him better than he knew himself and that invited him to “follow me.”

Today’s lesson might just embody the Gospel as well as any lesson that Jesus ever taught.  But before we can come to understand the depth of these two parables, we need to come to an understanding about a misunderstanding.  Jo Anne Taylor tells us that, “We have it in our heads that repentance means admitting our sin and turning away from it, in order to receive God’s forgiveness. It’s a transaction. We confess and repent, and in return God forgives.  But what if we consider that God has already forgiven us. Christ has already made everything right between God and us. God is just looking for us to come home.” [1]

We live in a transactional world.  We are accustomed to everything in our lives being transactional.  In fact, the transactional nature of our existence is such that, on those rare occasions when something truly isn’t transactional, our reaction is usually “What’s the catch?”  Can you imagine that?  Living in a world that is so cynical that when something is just given to us our first thought is to try to figure out what is the hidden cost.  And so it’s understandable that we may find God’s offer of total forgiveness to be something that has a hidden cost also; something that somehow requires some sort of recompense on our part.  But here is the simple, Gospel, truth:  Repentance is not a prerequisite for receiving God’s love and forgiveness.  God’s love and forgiveness is a given.  The Greek word that we translate as “repentance” is μετανοέω (met-uh-noy-uh).  And μετανοέω actually means to think differently.

When we discover the fact that God, in His great mercy and love, has already forgiven the unforgivable in us; all of it, when we learn the truth that God has pursued us relentlessly, never giving up the hope that we will turn to Him and follow Him, when we realize that God’s love for us is unconditional, and that there really is no catch, no quid pro quo, and no possible way of repaying, then, and only then, do we find that capacity to think differently.  Then, and only then, can we stop being people for whom all of life is transactional and for whom something is always expected in return when we do something for someone else.  Then, and only then do we develop the capacity to emulate the love of God and do things for others that require no recompense.  Then, and only then, can we begin to love the world as God loves us.

So, let’s take a little journey today and explore these two parables.  And let’s start with the Pharisees because that is where today’s story starts.  Our text tells us that the Pharisees were watching Jesus closely, and that they were angry; yes, actually angry.  They were angry because Jesus was associating with “sinners”.  Garland helps us to understand who these “sinners” are when he explains to us that the “Tax collectors were outside the law, and the scribes and Pharisees object that Jesus appears to do nothing to bring them under the law.  The sinners could be apostate Jews who were not simply the wrong sort of people but notorious and persistent lawbreakers who brought dishonor to their fellow Jews.  They could comprise the godless who are presumed to be without hope.  More likely, the Pharisees labeled them sinners because they were not meticulous or did not care to obey their rulings on purity standards of the Mosaic law.  “Sinners,” then, can simply be those who do not practice religion the way others think they should.” [2]  It’s not very hard to look at the church today and see this same attitude where acceptance into the community of believers requires prescribed behaviors and lifestyles.  But this is emphatically not how Jesus viewed repentance.  Garland continues. “From Jesus’ perspective, the sinners are those who, like the prodigal son, are lost and alienated from the Father and need to be restored.” [3]

And so, the Pharisees who are watching Jesus ARE angry; angry because these “sinners” are not living up to the Pharisee’s expectations.  But it gets worse.  The Jewish historian Alfred Edersheim tells us that there is an ancient Jewish saying that, “There is joy before God when those who provoke him perish from the world.”  These Pharisees actually believed that God rejoices when a sinner dies and goes to hell.  Is it any wonder that the Pharisees were outraged when Jesus, not only associated with these “sinners” but actually ate with them.  Because you see, in ancient times, to eat with someone was to accept them as part of your family.  And so, in eating with these sinners, Jesus was identifying Himself with them.  And here… here is the great irony of the Pharisee’s theology:  What they viewed as unacceptable behavior; Jesus’ identifying with and communing with sinners, is actually the Gospel.  Yes!  Jesus identifies with and communes with sinners.  What began with the Pharisees as accusation and judgment, becomes the very thing that saves us!  Jesus identifies with and communes with US.  And that communion, that identification is the very source of our forgiveness and the very sign of our acceptance into God’s family.  And the greatest tragedy of today’s story is the inability of the Pharisees to see that they too were in need of forgiveness, and that Jesus longed to identify and commune with them also.

Our journey now moves to the tax collectors and sinners.  Where the Pharisees were appalled by Jesus’ identification with sinners, the sinners embraced Jesus.  The sinners, finding forgiveness and acceptance that they had never experienced anywhere else, turned to Jesus.  And in turning to Jesus they found within themselves the ability to think differently.  Within their acceptance of the forgiveness and love that Jesus offered them, and the thinking differently that is an inescapable part of who they became when they chose to follow God, they too were restored to their beloved status as members of God’s family.  And again we need to consider today’s church and how it was the love and acceptance of Jesus, and not the Pharisee’s demands for moral living, that caused these “sinners” to “think differently” and to return to God.

And lastly, let’s look at God Himself.  Like Allen Robert’s mom, there is no end to God’s searching for the lost sinner, no question that God will leave the 99 to find the one who is lost but earnestly searching, no doubt that God will turn His house upside down and inside out to find that one lost sinner.  His love for His children is such that He will never stop searching, never stop calling, and never give up hope that His children will return to Him.  And when they do, God, and all of heaven celebrate.  

When a Jewish woman was married, she was given a headdress that had 10 silver coins on it.  So immutably hers were these coins that they were not even permitted to be taken as payment for a debt.  It is widely assumed that the coin that the woman lost in today’s parable was from this headdress.  And if that is the case, then her losing that coin would be just like a woman today losing her engagement ring.  In today’s second parable when the woman finally found her coin, she threw a party.  Now, am I the only person who thinks that it may have cost more for her to throw that party than what the coin that was found was worth?  It’s possible, right?  But the value of what was found was more than just the value of the coin itself.  And so great was the joy over finding that coin, that the cost of the party was rendered insignificant.  And so it is when even one sinner turns to God.  Because our value to God is more than we can possibly imagine.  And the party that He throws in joyful celebration of the return of just that one sinner, well, I’m kind of looking forward to going to one of those parties, aren’t you?

Our two parables today teach us something about the nature of God and the nature of His grace.  They also teach us something about ourselves…  About God, we are given a glimpse into the depth of the love that He has for His children.  We see a love that is graciously forgiving, radically inclusive, and a love that relentlessly pursues reconciliation between God and each and every one of His beloved children.  About us, as hard as it is to admit, we see ourselves in the actions of the Pharisees.  How often do we expect others to conform?  How often do we demand that others worship like us, or look like us, or love like us?  But my dear friends, what we are really called to do is to love without exception, without borders, without demands, without expectations.

The faith of the Christian is not about what we do.  It is about who we are.  It is about allowing God to restore that relationship with Him that we were intended to have from the very foundation of the universe.  It is about responding when He calls us to His side by thinking differently, by looking at the world not through eyes of judgment and disapproval, but through eyes of love.  And once we understand this; once we understand what it means to love AS JESUS LOVED, inclusively, extravagantly, and graciously, then we will find it impossible NOT to be relentless ourselves in sharing His love with the world. 

---

[1] Jo Anne Taylor, PastorSings.com, Jesus Eats with Sinners

[2] David E. Garland, Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Luke, Pg. 611

[3] Ibid

Counting the Cost

September 7, 2025

Luke 14:25-33

            I moved to New Jersey from Ohio in the summer after my freshman year in high school.  I was a fairly good trombone player when I was in high school and it wasn’t long before my new friends in the band were asking me to join a drum and bugle corps in Eatontown called the Royales.  I didn’t even know what a drum and bugle corps was, and I had zero interest in joining it.  But, one day, a group of my friends from band knocked on the door at my house and asked me to come with them to a Royales practice, just to see what it was all about.  I went with them, and once I got there, I was told that if I wanted a ride home, I had to join; so I was basically kidnapped.  But joining that corps was, and remains, one of my life’s best decisions.  Not only did I meet my wife there, but the lessons that I learned about teamwork and about the depth of commitment required to become as good at something as you can possibly be are lessons that have served me well for a lifetime.  I marched in that corps from age 15 to age 18… just 3 seasons, but the impact that that experience had on my life is far out of proportion to the amount of time that I spent doing it.

            By the time I was in my senior year, I was practicing either my trombone or my bugle 6 hours a day and I was an all-state trombone player.  In college I had the privilege of playing professionally as a studio musician, but there is no doubt in my mind that if it weren’t for my experience in that drum corps I never would have become the musician that I became.  Why?  Because being a part of that organization taught me how to prioritize; how to make music the one thing that I worked on to the exclusion of the everyday distractions that most teens face.  Anybody remember that great teen club that was in Shrewsbury in the early 70’s?  I became a member and really enjoyed going there, but after I joined the corps, I never went there again.  I ran track, but I quit the track team, I didn’t really have a social life outside of the corps, and I even got into trouble a few times for ditching school events in favor of a corps contest or exhibition. 

            We were a mediocre corps when I joined.  Three years later, with a corps full of committed, hardworking kids, and great adult leadership, we took 2^nd place in the World Open Class B contest and finished 3^rd in the NJ State Chapionships, beating some pretty good corps.  During those three years a lot of kids joined and then quit.  Practices were often marathon affairs, marching in the EAI parking lot long after dark with car headlights lighting the way so we could see where we were marching… kind of.  The ones who weren’t committed didn’t stay.  The ones who were, did, with the end result that we became a pretty good corps.  It was one of the best experiences of my life.

            So, why am I telling you all this story today?  I’m telling you this because today’s lesson is all about commitment.  Our story tells us that Jesus had a large group accompanying Him.  And it’s interesting that Luke chooses to use the Greek word Συνεπορεύοντο (sin-ee-poor-you-ontoe), and that he used this instead of the Greek word, Δεῦτε (Deu-tuh).  Every time in the Bible that Jesus says to someone “Follow me” the Greek word that He uses is Δεῦτε.  The root of Δεῦτε is “duo” and the word describes two people doing something together, or two people working towards a common purpose.  But Συνεπορεύοντο means simply to accompany someone or to travel with someone.  Can we see the difference? 

            Those of us who are following the TV show “The Chosen” have seen what happens when Jesus bids someone to follow Him.  Andrew, Peter, Simon the Zealot, and Matthew all dropped their lives right on the spot, walked away from what they were doing, and pretty much instantly became disciples.  It was a sudden and monumental change in each of their lives.  And so it’s important for us to see the distinction between following someone and just accompanying them.  And this is especially important as it relates to following Jesus.

            At some point in our story, I guess Jesus turned around and saw this huge crowd behind Him, but the thing is, Jesus knew their hearts… every single one of them.  He knew who was accompanying Him just in hopes of seeing a miracle.  He knew who was accompanying Him in hopes of being healed.  He knew who was accompanying Him in hopes of watching Him overthrow the Romans and establishing Israel as prominent among the nations.  And so, Jesus stopped, and He gave all of those who were accompanying Him a reality check.

            “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.”  Something tells me that this would not be a very effective approach in a door-to-door evangelism drive.  It also seems incongruous that the One who admonishes us to love our enemies would be asking us to hate those closest to us.  But we need to understand that Jesus is using an ancient Hebrew idiom that was not talking about hate as an emotion but rather was using the word “hate” comparatively.  Brown tells us that, “In Genesis 29:30-31, we hear that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah and that Leah was “hated” by Jacob. A similar use of [this] Hebrew word for “hate” occurs in Deuteronomy 21:15-17 where [discussing inheritances] it is also clear that the issue is one of preference or allegiance.  This coheres with what we have seen in Luke and Matthew. Jesus is not calling his followers to hate their families in terms of emotional response; instead, he is calling for undivided loyalty to himself, even above family loyalties” [1]

            And this isn’t the first time that Jesus has said something that caused those accompanying (not following) to walk away.  Jesus was not interested in the quantity of His followers, But He was deeply interested in changing the lives of His followers, and that is not something that Jesus could accomplish without the active participation of those following Him.  And so, here Jesus tells two parables that are designed to ask those who are accompanying Him to consider the true cost of following Him and whether or not they are willing to pay that cost. 

            Several years ago, a company petitioned the city of Asbury Park to allow them to take over part of a city street and to build a building where that street had been.  I don’t really know the particulars of that endeavor, but I do know that this project, called the Esperanza, was half built before it ended up being abandoned by the builder, blocking off a city street for years.  Does anybody remember that building? In the middle of the road?  According to the builders, construction was halted due to a dip in the housing market, but one can’t help but compare the Esperanza with Jesus’ first parable today where Jesus tells us that one needs to count the cost before beginning any project.  Our story tells us that Jesus said, “When he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him.” And I would imagine that that half-built building in Asbury Park was a major embarrassment to the builder for quite a few years.

            In the 2^nd parable today, Jesus talks about a king trying to determine whether he has the wherewithal to defeat a superior force that is coming against him.  These two parables appear to be somewhat alike, but Morris tells us that there is a critical difference between the two.  “The two parables are similar, but they make slightly different points.” Morris says, “The builder of the tower is free to build or not as he chooses, but the king is being invaded.  He must do something.  In the first parable Jesus says, ‘sit down and reckon whether you can afford to follow me’.  In the second He says ‘sit down and reckon whether you can afford to refuse my demands’.  Both ways of looking at it are important”.  [2]

            And so it is that Jesus speaks to the crowd that accompanies Him and speaks to us as well.  Are we willing to do more than just accompany Him?  Are we willing to sit down and consider the cost of following Him, AND are we willing to sit down and consider the cost of not following Him?  Garland tells us that, “What the text does not spell out is that one will lose everything anyway whatever one’s choice.”  You can’t take it with you, right?  “The only question is whether one will lose all as a follower of Jesus and for the sake of God’s reign, or as one who refuses to follow and obey.  Which, in other words, is the more promising course of action?” [3]

            We, as Christians, are called to discipleship.  We are called to make God’s kingdom our priority, called to make the spreading of the Gospel and the sharing of God’s love our highest motivation in life.  Often in this world people will ask the question, “What’s in it for me?”  But when it comes to faith, when it comes to Jesus, that’s not at all the right question to be asking, because what we do for Jesus isn’t done out of a desire for personal gain, it’s done out of a response to what God, through Jesus, has already done for us.  And when we make this choice, we are called to be all in.  We give up the worldly, in order to gain the heavenly.  Cousar, Gaventa, McCann, and Newsome tell us that, “Material possessions have a seductive appeal that can turn them quickly from being servants to being masters.  They become excess baggage that make the journey with Jesus difficult to negotiate.  Thus, at the outset, choices need to be made.  ‘You cannot serve God and wealth’”. [4] 

            I spoke about my experience with the Royales today because, when it came to the Royales, I really was all in.  I, and my friends in the corps, had each made personal choices to commit ourselves to making that corps to be as good as we could possibly make it.  And each of us learned the lessons about the importance of giving your best effort when others are relying on you to do so.  This kind of all in commitment is exactly what Jesus is talking about in today’s lesson. While we certainly aren’t actually going to be hating anyone!  We will each be called to be all in with our choice to commit ourselves to the spreading of the Gospel and to the living of our lives in a way that glorifies God.  In exchange for our commitment, we receive a promise that is almost impossible to comprehend.  A promise to be loved and cared for by the creator of the universe.  A promise that we will become part of a society of love and compassion and caring.  A promise that we will become the person that God has always intended for us to be.  And so, our question today is, are we accompanying, or are we following?

---

[1] Jeannine K. Brown, WorkingPreacher.org,. Commentary on Luke 1425-33

[2] Leon Morris, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Luke, Pg, 259

[3] David E. Garland, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Luke, Pg. 607

[4] Charles B. Cousar, Beverly R. Gaventa, J. Clinton McCann, & James D. Newsome, A Lectionary Commentary Based on the NRSV-Year C, Pg. 505