09 May 2024
In Luke 12:13-21 we have the Parable of the Rich Fool.
Bailey blows it immediately, insisting that the Hebrews did not believe in a distinction between body and soul, and that Paul believed this current fleshly body would be resurrected. This is not at all the Hebrew teaching nor Paul's, and Heiser hammers that home in his writings. It also has nothing to do with the parable.
However, he correctly reminds us that "Jesus said more about money than He did about prayer." His theme was that all things belong to His Father. The lie of Ananias and Sapphira was not having money, but lying about dedicating all of it to God. We are merely stewards of God's resources. This is also the failure of the Rich Fool.
The layout is ABCDCBA with an intro.
Intro: Someone asks Jesus to adjudicate an inheritance
A. General principle
B. Goods given
C. Dialog with self
D. Solution (soliloquy)
C. Dialog with self
B. Goods left
A. General principle
In the intro, the younger brother wants a share of an estate that apparently had no will. Bailey fails to explain that what this younger brother is seeking is one third, as the firstborn always gets a double share. But there is a major issue in that breaking up estates at that point in history was asking for trouble, and it was common for elders to buy out their younger brothers to keep a functioning farm, vineyard, etc., intact and keep it profitable. That is, if they had enough cash, which we can guess is lacking in this case. Instead, the elder is trying to keep his younger brother involved in partnership. It appears that the younger brother refuses to join in the family business and intends to sell his share to outsiders.
There is no good moral reason to go along with this plan, and Jesus refuses. Indeed, it's far more important to bring people together, not divide them. Unfortunately, Bailey wanders off from this theme into social justice again. Still, it's not that Jesus could not play the role of judge; rabbis often did so. Jesus refuses to take this case. His use of the address, "Man" is rather a rough rejection.
In the parable, the man receives a surplus from God, more than his usual harvest. He gave no thought to giving it back to God, but how to hoard it for himself. His dialog was internal, not with family and friends. He decides to pull down the stacked rock walls and rebuild with the same stones plus some added stones a larger granary. Of course, all the work would be done by slaves or employees. He quotes a part of one line from Ecclesiastes about rejoicing over what one's labor has brought, but forgets the part about God being the source.
Bailey tries to bring his bad theology of the unitary soul/flesh into the picture at this point as the man talks to his own soul, but it fails. And so does the fool's plan. God says He will decide what happens next. Bailey points out how, in the Greek language, the terms for "rejoice" (euphraino expand the diaphragm) and "fool" (aphron) are etymologically related. At any rate, his life was on loan and that loan is being called in.
Back to Ecclesiastes again: In 2:18-19 Solomon regrets that, no matter what he accomplishes, he leaves it for someone else to inherit, and there's no way to ensure that heir would be wise. Then Jesus closes the message with a strong reminder that we must focus on who owns the material blessings that come into our lives. We are doing it all for Him.
This document is public domain; spread the message.