PARABLE OF THE TWO DEBTORS (LUKE 7:36-50)

This is seemingly a simple parable told at a dinner party, but it has its share of unusual and problematic features nonetheless. One Jewish scholar even called this “one of the treasured religious possessions of the Western world.” (quoted by Snodgrass)

“This scene is one of the great episodes in the Lucan Gospel.” (Fitzmyer)

As with most of Jesus' parables, it is meaningless without considering the context. There are parallel banquet scenes in Matthew 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; and John 12:1-8 which do not contain the parable, and the relationship between these various accounts is uncertain. We will only look at Luke's account, but Raymond Brown believes there were at least two separate events being narrated.

Snodgrass reviews different ways this whole scene can be broken down into sections. By far the most convincing is that of K. Bailey, adapted slightly:

    introduction (7:36-37a)

        outpouring of woman's love (7:37b-38)

            dialogue (7:39-40)

                parable (7:41-42)

            dialogue (7:43)

        outpouring of woman's love (7:44-47)

    conclusion (7:48-50)

Let's look at the overall story, verse-by-verse.

Verse 36 The meal was probably held right after the synagogue service. We don't need to be suspicious of the Pharisee's motives; he may have just been curious to hear more of Jesus' teachings.

Verse 37 The presence of lookers-on was not unusual at meals. If it bothers you that the woman was a prostitute (and it shouldn't), consider that “sinner” may have other meanings in the context: wife of a man engaged in an dishonorable profession (unlikely since in v. 48 Jesus definitely calls her a sinner, not her husband), an adulteress, someone who had regular contacts with Gentiles, or even a disabled person. Also, the text says literally that she “was in the city a sinner,” implying that she had a bad reputation in the city, which may not have been entirely deserved. Years ago, when divorce in the USA was much rarer, it was common to regard any divorcee as a loose woman, whether that was true or not. My aunt was divorced, and men were constantly trying to hit on her, including our married Sunday school superintendent.

Verse 38 Since the guests at a table reclined with their feet facing out, it was easy for the woman to unobtrusively begin washing his feet. Everything the woman did went against social customs of the day: just being in the Pharisee's house to begin with, loosening her hair, showing uncontrolled emotions, wasting valuable ointment, defiling a righteous Jew with her touch, etc.

Verse 39 The Pharisee's reaction was understandable and fit in with the beliefs of the day. Here are two quotes from the Book of Sirach (found in the Apocrypha) written some years earlier: “No one pities a person who associates with a sinner.” “What does a wolf have in common with a lamb? No more has a sinner with the devout.” Snodgrass makes a very insightful comment regarding Jesus' different attitude: “He thought holiness was stronger and more contagious than defilement.” I was raised in a fundamentalist church where it was assumed that any contact between a Christian and a non-believer would automatically lead to the Christian being adversely influenced, rather than considering that we might influence the non-believer instead.

The second point to make regarding this verse is the irony involved. Did you catch it? The Pharisee assumes that Jesus can't be a prophet since he should have been able to read the woman's mind to see that she was a sinner. However, Jesus' subsequent words and actions show that he had read the Pharisee's mind quite clearly.

Verses 40-42 So in response, Jesus launches into a parable to teach the Pharisee, we now know that his name is Simon, a lesson by catching him off-guard. As with most of Jesus' stories, it concerns everyday events but usually has an unexpected twist. In this case, the unusual event is that the creditor completely forgives all of the debts of the two men. Then Jesus puts Simon on the spot by asking a simple question: “Which man will love the creditor more?”

Verse 43 Simon replies cautiously, perhaps realizing that he is caught in a trap (“I suppose”). Jesus says that he has judged rightly, but that also means that Simon has also judged himself by his words.

Verses 44-46 At this point, Jesus brings the point home to make it perfectly clear. He begins by asking Simon, “Do you see this woman?” Some commentators have pointed out that the Pharisee does not really see her as a human being, only as a category. There is an interesting comparison between the woman's actions which demonstrated both humility and love, and Jesus' washing the feet of his disciples for the same reasons. Then Jesus lays into Simon by comparing his inadequate treatment of his guest to that shown by the woman. There is a slight difference of opinion regarding how the host should have treated Jesus, but all are in agreement that at the very least, Simon should have provided water for Jesus to wash his own feet.

“The Pharisee was attracted to Jesus and his teachings, but not enough to accept him with formal signs of fellowship.” (D. Muller)

Verse 47 The main problem in interpreting this parable comes in this verse. KJV reads, “Her sins, which are many, are forgiven for she loved much.” One obvious false interpretation of this statement is that she was forgiven because she had many lovers. Another possible implication that we should not derive from this parable is that Simon had little or no sins to be forgiven, although he obviously felt that way.

But even if we reject these interpretations, there is still a remaining problem. It appears that her salvation is due to her actions (salvation by works), and that is exactly the lesson that some Roman Catholic commentators get out of this story: a demonstration of love deserves God's forgiveness. Snodgrass even cites a number of other NT passages in which apparently a person's actions precede their forgiveness rather than following them. He concludes, “the woman's actions are simultaneously indications of and reasons for her forgiveness.” Here are some other reasons why this verse does not teach salvation by works:

    1. It is obvious that some life-changing encounter with Jesus must have preceded this event.

    2. The key word hoti is better translated, not as “because” or “for,” but as “in recognition of the fact that.”

    3. The verb tense regarding forgiveness in vv. 47a and 48 should be translated as “have been forgiven” (i.e., sometime in the past)

    4. “To love” may also mean “to show gratitude (for something that has already happened).”

    5. The parable itself makes it clear that forgiveness precedes love (or gratitude).

    6. Finally, verse 50 makes it clear that it is her faith, not her actions, that saved her.

Verse 50 Two more comments regarding this final verse are in order.

Marshall: Jesus uses a variation on a standard Jewish farewell: “May God's peace be yours” which takes on a fuller meaning here. 

The fact that Jesus at the end does not say, “Go and sin no more” may indicate that (1) she is not a prostitute or (2) she is a slave who has been forced into it against her will. (M. A. Powell)