Jn 12''), indicative of the Lian's charactT.
In the iianilili ■ ;' ' ' ' ■'-' ~'
i-ile hypocrisy of the
^""'I^ I , I . I hii-ing Ih'e amount of their debts (Lk
',',''[■., .. ,', I, .it all events, this appears to be a
fruioMM,,! ,. hi, uhl vet the steward is commended for i,' .,.,1 l.cH 111' 1" ilic 'disciples as an example for them t f'.llou it is tn l^e observed, however, that the comraenda- tton'comes from the rich ni.xn, not from Christ. The mastCT in the parable commends his steward. We Ihausen-m opposition to Juhcher-- ascribes v.s to Jesus, citing as paraUel Lk 186. Arr-nrrbm' tn this vicw. 0 zMis.' here iiicans 'the Lord — t.e. ChrM n'ot "his Lord,''as in AV and RV. But against that rendering is the fact that the rich man is called the steward 8 ■lord' throughout the parable. The natural conclusion is that the 'lord- referred to in v.8 is the ■ lord ■ previously mentioned in vv 3 5 Thus, as Dr. Plunimer remarks, the argument, like that implied by the parable of the Unjust Judge, 's a /"/■'•<??• Even a worthless, dishonest steward is commended by his master at le.ost for shrewdness ; much more, then, should a true servant of Christ act wisely. Of course, it is only the prudence, not the dishonestv, that is commended. This parable is an extreme instance for the rule that in »".v rfal''^ 'he main lessons only should be sought, and not >''*,^t'';'^/S"^^^ Possibly we should accept the suggestion that the estate wM farniedt«thc.s,ewar|wh;.,-..r^ honestjy apprnrrntP.! 11... . V. . p, sn lliat lus na ly ^^^^ ^^^^^^
there !
which honesty is one of the natural fruits
, J _J (1 «r.*. ' iTi T L- S15 {,jn\m\
r debts
had been t.. ployer, to 1 1 ground dow
means 'fair,' 'sound,' 'excellent' In the Synop- tics, when Jesus speaks of a thief (kX^tfti;?), it is not to denounce his Awckedness, but in one place (Mt gi9.a) cf Lk 12^) to warn His disciples against makuig treasures of earthly things which thieves may steal or moths corrupt ; and in another place (Mt 24**, cf. Lk 12^) to compare the suddenness and unexpectedness of His advent with the way in which a thief breaks into a house at night. In Jn 10«T- the false leaders of the people are compared to 'thieves and robbers' who ravage the flock, in contrast to the Good Shepherd who tends it. In the parable of the Good Samaritan the subject of neighbouriy kindness had fallen among robbers (Lk KF), whose excessive cruelty is described ; but the point of the parable is not in their conduct, which is referred to only in order to show the
depth of misery in
which their ^-ictim was found.
Jesus also refers to robbers, i.e. brigands (X^ffraf), when He denounces the Jews for making God .s house 'a den of robbers' (Mk 11" RV ; cf. Mt 21'^ Lk 19*), quoting Jer 7". Here it is not common dishonesty that rouses our Lord's anger so much as the desecration of the house ot God. . ...
When the Je\vish authorities came with an armed troop to take Jesus, He expostulated with them, asking if they had come out against a robber (X„<rT^s, Mk 14« ; cf. Mt 26», Lk 22'=). In none of these cases does Jesus lay anj; stress on the ques- tion of dishonesty, the occasion not bringing it into discussion. His merciful words to one of the malefactors cni.ilic.l with Him (Lk 23«) cannot be taken as tlir..NN iiri li-Jit on His views of dishonesty
and its par.l.mi.l.l. 1 l.-cause the man was pro-
bablya bri.L'an.l inn, .. nt .ind a follower of Barab- ba.s,nota mci.. U.i..t. Still it does indicate that "ross sins, among \\ liidi stealing may be included, can be forgiven in those who turn to Christ. 'The one strong condemnation of theft in the Gospels is St. John's scornful description of Judas as ' a thief
'i,i-''lc^r.'.i iK.'i'ij.u'.i'ili.' t..iia.its, whom he cruelfv- imi be took tlie parable as a warning
^,.,.,„„ „ „. zeal "for God at the cost of unkindness to men,
Sn whom in the name of God too heavy requirements are laid (Pastor Padorum, pp. SSC-SflS). AV. F. AdENEY.
HONEY.— Honey is mentioned very frequently in the OT : twenty times in the proverbial expres- sion 'a land flowing with milk and "oney (h,x ok" 135 333, Lv 20^ Nu 13« 14» 16"'-, Dt 6' 11» V'= 273 31™ Jos 58, Jer 11= 32=^ Ezk 20«- '=) ; or in other connexions, either litera,lly, as a P'oduct of the soil and as food (Gn 43" Dt »« 32'' Jg 1481.18 1 S 1435t.S9.J3 2S 17=^, 1 K 14^ 2 lv 18^ 2Ch 3P, Job 20", Ps 81^ Is 7'=-="-, Jer 41«, Ezk ifii3.i9 Sir 113 3926). or figuratively, as a term ot
ompariso; for sJeetness^Ex 16< P« f "UO';^ Pr 53 16=^ 24'»'- 25'«- ", Ca 4" 5', Ezk 3', Sir 24™ 49M. On the other hand, it is very rarely named in the NT, and especially in the Gospels. There is no direct evidence that the Jews were acquaintetl -i^-ith any other honey than that of wild bees. Yet the fact that in 2 Ch 31» honey is included among the products of which the first-fruits were to be ottered, would appear to represent it as an object of culture, and the mention of l^^ild honey as part of the food of John the Baptist (Mt SMVIk 1 fsyr. Sin., perhaps under the influence of Dt 32 and Ps 8P« has 'honey of the mounteins ]) appears to point by way of contrast to the existence of honev derived from domesticated bees As to arti-