There were two debtors of a certain creditor one owed five hundred denarii and the other fifty;
Jesus is at dinner in Simon the Pharisee's house when a woman known in town as a sinner weeps at His feet. Simon judges her without a word, and the Lord answers with a story about a lender and two debtors.
Simon says nothing out loud. The parable is the Lord's response to what was going on inside him.
Simon only "spoke within himself." He thought that Jesus had no discernment about the woman. At once the Lord showed him that He knew his hypocrisy and read his secret thoughts. He did it by putting to him the parable of the two debtors. One debtor owed ten times more than the other. Yet neither had any assets, so both were equally bankrupt. And the creditor treated them alike; there was forgiving mercy for both. This parable was meant to bring one truth home to Simon. His sins might be fewer than the woman's, but he too was completely bankrupt. He needed forgiving mercy just as she did.
The story is not an abstract illustration. Its two characters are sitting and standing in that house.
In this house of Simon the Pharisee, the Lord comes into contact with two people, representatives of two moral generations. I mean His host, and a sinner of the city. And these are the two debtors in the parable which the Lord tells on the occasion, and which is found in the heart of the story.
The Lord does not deny the gap between the two sums. By outward reckoning one life was ten times worse than the other. It changed nothing.
It is as much as to say this. Suppose it is true that this woman openly breaks God's laws, and that her obvious sins are plain to see. Suppose people count her ten times as great a violator of right principles as some others, and call her a five hundred pence debtor. Then suppose little can be said against Simon about outward misconduct. Suppose even that his offences against outward morality are few, and seldom repeated, so that he is only a fifty pence debtor. Still, the fact is this: whether the debt is little or much, both are so thoroughly bankrupt that they have nothing whatever to pay their creditor's demand.
The next verse turns on the phrase "they could not pay". Neither man can offer a part payment, and neither can promise his way out.
"And when they had nothing to pay" — here is another point where there is no difference. And yet, if you look at it another way, there is the greatest possible difference. As to ability to pay, there is no difference at all. Not only could His holiness not allow us to settle for less, but we on our part could not. All we can do is draw drafts on the future — a bank where we have no credit, and where not one of our drafts is honoured. We can promise: that indeed is easy; but which of our performances ever did anything but increase the debt?
Older translations say the creditor "frankly forgave them both." The ESV says he "cancelled the debt of both." The word behind it also turns up in Paul's letters.
Luke 7:42. — The word "forgave" (ἐχαρίσατο) is one of the Greek words that Luke shares with Paul (Rom. 3:24; Eph. 2:8 and following).
The parable settles the sequence, and commentators point to it as the key that unlocks verse 47.
Some say the woman's sins were forgiven because she did the acts the Lord praises. That thought reverses the whole parable. It also contradicts verse 50, which says: "Your faith has saved you." Not your love! The parable clearly teaches that the creditor freely cancelled both debts before either debtor did a thing. The words "for she loved much" do not give the cause or reason why she was forgiven. They give the proof that let others see she was truly forgiven.
The story left Simon cold. A man who has never counted a debt has nothing to be glad about when debts are cancelled.
What personal interest could he have in such a topic? He was not a debtor; he had harmed nobody. He was not like this poor sinner; he had always met every just demand... What need had he for forgiveness, who had never felt a burden or acknowledged a debt? Those words of the parable, "He frankly forgave," might thrill others, but there was no warmth, no music in them for him.
- Debt. Both people in Simon's house owed; the only question the parable allows is how much, not whether.
- Bankruptcy. Five hundred or fifty, neither could pay anything at all — a smaller debt is still an unpayable one.
- Gift. The creditor cancelled both debts for free, and Luke's word for it is one he shares with Paul.
- Love. Forgiveness came first and love followed. Her love proved the pardon; it never paid for it.
- Coldness. Simon stayed unmoved by the story, because a man who admits no debt can feel no gratitude.
but as they had nothing to pay, he forgave both of them [their debt] [say,] which of them therefore will love him most?
Simon the Pharisee is thinking that Jesus cannot be a prophet, because He lets a sinful woman touch Him. Jesus answers with a story about a creditor and two debtors, one owing ten times the other. The question He puts back to His host is not who owed more, but who will love more once the debt is gone.
Simon said nothing out loud. The parable exposes him anyway, and his own reply becomes the verdict on himself.
He read the man's heart as well as the woman's, and, yet more, He revealed God's love. Simon did not say a word, but thought his evil words to himself... "I suppose," said Simon, "the one he forgave the most." So Simon condemned himself without knowing it, and proved the grace of God right. Here was a man with no real sense of sin, and no sense at all of forgiveness.
The two sums stand for the two people in that room. The difference between them turns out not to matter.
It is as much as to say: suppose it is true that this woman openly breaks God's laws, and her sins are plain for all to see. Suppose people count her ten times as great a breaker of right principles as some others. Call her a five hundred pence debtor. Then suppose there is little to say against Simon in outward conduct... so that he is only a fifty pence debtor. Still, whether the debt is little or much, both are bankrupt. Neither has anything at all to pay what the creditor demands. This is most important, because the question is no longer whether a person is a great sinner or a little sinner. The question is: are your sins forgiven?
The phrase rules out what a debtor normally tries: an arrangement, part payment, a promise to do better.
As to ability to pay, there is no difference at all. It was not only that His holiness could not allow us to settle for less; we on our part could not do it either. All we can do is write cheques against the future. That is a bank where we have no credit, and it honours none of our cheques. We can promise; that is easy. But which of our performances ever did anything except increase the debt?
Older translations read "frankly forgave," where the ESV has "he cancelled the debt of both." One Greek verb lies behind both, and it means more than a debt let go.
The Greek verb behind these two English words is full of meaning. According to M. R. Vincent: "More is expressed by the verb than simply giving. He gave as a free, gracious, joy-giving gift." You can see what the verb implies in Romans 8:32, where it also occurs... The act of giving freely means an act that is full of pleasure to the heart of the one who does it. A creditor often grows bitter in spirit as he looks at an unpaid debt. How Christ shines in the glory of grace here in Luke 7.
The manner matters as much as the fact. A debt can be waived with hard words that make the debtor remember it forever.
In the case referred to here, the joy behind the action colours the action in the eyes of the debtor, giving it added value and so winning his unreserved devotion. If the release is given reluctantly there will still be mistrust; but here there is joy on the part of the creditor in giving the release, which only increases the joy in the debtor's heart.
The Lord's closing question shows which way love runs. Forgiveness comes first; love is the response.
This is exactly how love to God grows in the heart. Its spring is knowing that sins are forgiven. How obvious that a full and complete forgiveness must be a known fact to produce this response... No promise to do good in the future can pay the debt of our sinful past.
And this response is not a bonus. It is what the grace was aiming at.
Has He not come, and died, and risen again, to win our hearts for Himself? Does He not state it as the express purpose of the grace that has brought us the full and free forgiveness of our sins?... He looked for nothing less than this as the effect of that grace.
The parable divides into two conditions, and only one of them is ours to admit.
If you know in yourself that the first part applies to you, then the second part does too. If it is true of you that you have nothing to pay God with, then it is certainly true that He freely forgives you. Take that sweet assurance to your heart... God's thoughts are not like ours. The unbelieving saying that something is "too good to be true" never applies to Him.
- Debt — Simon and the woman owe very different amounts. Neither can pay a penny. The sums are ten to one; the bankruptcy is the same.
- Nothing — "Nothing to pay" rules out instalments, promises and self-improvement. Cheques drawn on our future come back unpaid.
- Freely — the creditor cancels both debts as a joy-giving gift, not a bitter concession. Grace pleases the heart of the One who gives it.
- Love — the Lord's question settles the direction. Forgiveness known is the cause; love is the effect.
- You — the parable is a title deed for you. Admit the first half about yourself, and the second half is yours to take.
And Simon answering said, I suppose he to whom he forgave the most. And he said to him, Thou hast rightly judged.
Jesus has just told a short story to Simon, His host. A moneylender wiped out the debts of two men, one owing ten times as much as the other, and Jesus asked which man would love him more. Simon's reply is cautious, and it is correct. The Lord accepts it, then turns it back on him.
The parable turns on a likeness Simon had not noticed.
If a creditor forgives a debt, the former debtor will love him, and the bigger the debt, the greater his love will be. The woman and Simon were different in many ways, and Simon focused on the difference. But according to the Lord Jesus there was a basic likeness despite all the differences. They were both destitute: utterly bankrupt with nothing to pay. You could tell the two debts apart by size. Even so, both men were thrown completely on the mercy of their creditor.
Simon does not answer warmly. He starts with a hedge — yet the answer he gives settles more than he means it to.
Simon has no choice but to give the conclusion that in principle justifies the actions of the woman, and with them the Person she directed them to. His "I suppose" probably implies an uneasy reluctance. He answered with caution, perhaps wanting to leave a way out for himself. Along with the other Pharisees he had judged John the Baptist, the Lord Jesus and His followers. He considered himself fully competent to sit as judge in those cases. Now he judges correctly in principle. In principle that also settles all the other questions he had judged completely wrong.
"You have judged rightly" praises the reasoning only. A man can state a truth and still stand outside it.
So, without knowing it, Simon condemned himself and vindicated the grace of God. Here was a man with no real sense of sin, with no sense whatever of forgiveness, and so without fear of God, let alone love. And here was the woman who truly acknowledged her enormous debt in the presence of grace. Her love was real and great. As our Lord said, Simon judged the truth rightly in theory. But he had no faith, and he hated and despised the Lord.
Simon's flat reply fits a man who cannot see himself anywhere in the story.
It took no special sharpness of mind to find the answer to that riddle. Simon had to give it, though he did so without enthusiasm. What personal interest could he have in such a subject? He was not a debtor; he had harmed nobody. He was not like this poor sinner; he had always met every fair demand. And as for God — was he not a Pharisee, fasting twice a week, saying his prayers, paying his tithes? Was that not enough? What need had he for forgiveness, who had never felt a burden or admitted a debt?
Simon's answer names a difference between the two debtors — but not a difference in what they received.
The amount of the debt made no difference in this respect. The Pharisee and the sinner of the city could both be met here. There was no difference as to the way or the certainty of forgiveness. The difference that this would make would naturally be of another kind.
That other difference is love — a measure we can turn on ourselves.
Simon had no true appreciation of the position he was in. He did not think he needed the free grace of God; he thought he had earned His blessing. The more deeply we feel the grace of God and the blessing that grace brings us, the greater our response of love to Him will be.
Simon judged the case correctly. The same verdict puts a question back to him.
Did Simon realize that there was anything in his life that needed forgiveness? Did he in practice dismiss it as "little"? Some think their sins hardly matter, and so they think they have no need of forgiveness. Others, whose sins are no worse than the first group's, still see their sins as a serious offence against God, and carry a deep burden because of them. Their hearts cry out for forgiveness. When they know they are forgiven, they love much.
- Debt — Simon and the woman differ in the size of the bill, not in the fact of owing it.
- Bankruptcy — neither debtor could pay a thing. Both depended entirely on the creditor's mercy.
- Pardon — the respectable man and the notorious sinner are forgiven the same way, with the same certainty.
- Love — the one real difference is the warmth of the answering love. It grows with the sense of how much was cancelled.
- Verdict — Simon judges rightly and so sentences himself: a man who feels no debt will feel no love.