Story of the dishonest steward. This parable is only found in Luke 16.1–9. See the literature. The story assumes an audience familiar with property management and debt system of the time. A proper understanding of the parable, therefore, has to begin with solid knowledge of the economic and legal background.

Some of the questions to be asked are: is the manager a slave? what is the source of his power to enact change in the contracts, granted the willingness of the farmers (tenants)? Second, how is one to explain the fifty percent rebate in the case of olive oil, and twenty percent in the case of grain? Higher class debt in one case, or better calculation? Or irony on the part of the story teller, regarding the real value of olive oil and its marketability? Further, is the absolute quantity about twenty years worth of the stuff? An insurance scheme of sorts then? Finally, what can one say about the level of literacy of the tenants?

Regarding basic economy of the time: first, a system of debt was in existence that drew the maximum labor possible from tenants or rather sharecroppers, and their families (meaning wives and children). Interest wouldn’t be mentioned, but can be assumed to be part of the lump sum that is owed to the master. The steward was authorized to make binding contracts for his master. He was given signs of authority for so doing. Contra certain authors (Fitzmyer more recently, for instance), the steward couldn’t have been pocketing the interest and then expect to see feelings of obligation on the part of the sharecroppers when he returned the unjustly acquired interest. His job is well described in the parable of the Talents: to make money for his master, regardless of the appropriateness of the means, and perhaps make some for himself in the process.

Note on the context: the preceding stories of God’s mercy for sinners imply that one is to share possessions with the needy.