Luke 19:25
(And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)
Original Language Analysis
καὶ
(And
G2532
καὶ
(And
Strong's:
G2532
Word #:
1 of 7
and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words
αὐτῷ
unto him
G846
αὐτῷ
unto him
Strong's:
G846
Word #:
3 of 7
the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative g1438) of the third person, and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons
Κύριε
Lord
G2962
Κύριε
Lord
Strong's:
G2962
Word #:
4 of 7
supreme in authority, i.e., (as noun) controller; by implication, master (as a respectful title)
Historical Context
The crowd's objection reflects natural human reasoning: redistribute from those who have much to those who have little. This proto-socialist economics seems 'fair' to human minds but contradicts kingdom principles. In ancient honor-shame cultures, generous patrons rewarded productive clients with more responsibility while dismissing unproductive ones. The audience would recognize the master's action as just by cultural standards, even if it offended modern sensibilities about equality of outcome.
Questions for Reflection
- How does worldly thinking about 'equality' and 'fairness' distort your understanding of kingdom rewards?
- Why will some of God's judgments seem 'unfair' to human reasoning, yet be perfectly just?
- How can you battle envy when watching more fruitful servants receive greater opportunities and rewards?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
(And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.) (καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ· Κύριε, ἔχει δέκα μνᾶς, kai eipan autō· Kyrie, echei deka mnas)—the bystanders object, thinking the redistribution unfair. This parenthetical interjection reveals human reasoning: 'The rich get richer while the poor lose everything—that's unjust!' Their protest exposes confusion about kingdom economics: they think equality means equal outcomes regardless of faithfulness.
The objection reveals worldly thinking that has infected the church: 'Everyone deserves equal opportunities regardless of fruitfulness.' But kingdom stewardship operates differently: faithful managers receive more to steward; unfaithful ones lose what they had. This isn't about God's love (equal for all believers) or salvation (equally free for all who believe), but about stewardship and rewards. The objection also shows that observers will question God's justice at the judgment—yet His verdicts will stand. Human notions of 'fairness' don't bind divine judgment.