It’s Just Business! Or Is It? Rethinking the Prodigal Son and the Shrewd Manager Together (Luke 15:11–16:14)

We all know the saying: “It’s just business!” But what does it mean? To pick two cynical examples: A company sees a loophole where it can avoid paying royalties to an inventor. So, it doesn’t pay. Why? It’s just business! Or, a company has no confidentiality clause set up for dismissed workers. So, they feel free to retaliate by sharing the company’s secrets. Why? It’s just business! And fair enough, some will say. Fair is fair. But for many this doesn’t seem fair, as exposed by the 2003 documentary The Corporation, a film exploring the personality profiles of companies. Imagine corporations were humans. How would one describe their personalities? This was the question explored by writer Joel Bakan alongside filmmaker Harold Crooks. Their answer was unflattering. Having analyzed the behavior of marquis firms, Bakan and Crooks decided that sociopath was the best description for most corporations, someone with a personality disorder. The average corporation projects a persona of care, but behind this is a self-absorbed, heartless, and self-seeking individual. The average corporation isn’t nice. But is this a problem? In both examples just given, no laws were broken. So, what’s the issue? And here’s the real question: what exactly does it mean for a business to act ethically, which has implications for Christians working within them?

The Bible has a lot to say about business ethics, if only we take a closer look. It illustrates two competing systems, two systems we might broadly categorize as ethical systems of ancient society, which by implication spill over into business ethics, then and now.

The first system is a classic this-world structure for the ages. It is based at almost every point on reciprocity, a system of strict rules of engagement, a system of effort and return, but one often appearing to lack ‘heart’. We know there were issues with this system—at least in the minds of some—given the emergence of philosophies like Zeno’s early Stoicism and Cynicism, philosophies challenging societal norms. The Bible presents another system, one which feels more like the way things should be. Let’s call this alternative “Hesedism” (from the Hebrew word for “loving kindness”). We do not have time in this article to address every aspect of the two social systems just mentioned. But we will at least slow down enough to note comparisons and contrasts and apply them to modern business practices. We will do this via one key text, before considering what some business experts are saying today about best business practices.

If we had to put matters more positively: might we see a day when “It’s just business” could be 1,000 times more positive? Could there be a time when businesses themselves unambiguously testify to being key parts of God’s project for transforming the world? No workplace, of course, will be perfect until Jesus’s return. But we ought to believe that God is interested in producing a kind of first fruits of new creation already (Romans 8), which should be observable in business practices too.

Luke 15–16 is a ‘chunk’, a single literary unit, something not always noted. But this is a point for serious consideration. Ponder for a moment the consequences of missing the important context framing a movie. Imagine you arrive to a cinema 10 minutes late, missing the first part of a whodunit, where “who” “dun it”. Then imagine you have to leave the theater 10 minutes early, right before the murderer is revealed. Ever after, if you attempt to speak with authority on this film, you have none. You cannot talk of this movie with authority because you never came to grips with its story as presented. This is like what happens when Luke 15–16 is read. We start with Luke 15 focusing immediately on the Parable of the Lost Sheep, moving to the Lost Coin, then to the Lost Son, and we imagine that the heart of Luke 15 has been found. But what we don’t realize is that the narrative arc continues. There is more. Besides this, Luke 15 has a beginning, covering “who” and “dun it”.

Luke 15:1–2 starts: “Now the tax collectors and sinners were all gathering around to hear Jesus. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, ‘This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.’” Societal outcasts frame the story. But so do Jewish religious leaders. This is what led Tim Keller to rightly focus on both sons in the parable of the lost sons, noting that considering the context this parable was as much about the Pharisees and teachers of the law (the older brother) as the wayward younger brother (the tax collectors and sinners). Keller was entirely right as far this goes—he bought his ticket and was seated early. But Keller nevertheless walked out early. We must read on.

To understand the passage more easily in context, read Luke 15c into Luke 16 straight through without chapter divisions and versification:

Jesus continued: “There was a man who had two sons. The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate.’ So he divided his property between them. Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had, set off for a distant country and there squandered his wealth in wild living. After he had spent everything, there was a severe famine in that whole country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to a citizen of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed pigs. He longed to fill his stomach with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything. When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired servants.’ So he got up and went to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him. The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate. Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing. So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on. ‘Your brother has come,’ he replied, ‘and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.’ The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him. But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’ ‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ Jesus told his disciples: “There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions. So he called him in and asked him, ‘What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer.’ The manager said to himself, ‘What shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I’m not strong enough to dig, and I’m ashamed to beg—I know what I’ll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses.’ So he called in each one of his master’s debtors. He asked the first, ‘How much do you owe my master?’ ‘Nine hundred gallons of olive oil,’ he replied. The manager told him, ‘Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred and fifty.’ Then he asked the second, ‘And how much do you owe?’ ‘A thousand bushels of wheat,’ he replied. He told him, ‘Take your bill and make it eight hundred.’ The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings. Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else’s property, who will give you property of your own? No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”  The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight.” (Luke 15:11–16:14)

You may feel at this point like we have more questions than answers. This is understandable, since the Parable of the Shrewd Manager (16:1–14) is one of the most difficult parables in the Bible. Is Jesus really commending dishonest behavior? Or could the problem be that we need to understand the context? Truthfully, there is a truckload of things going on rhetorically with these parables, meaning we can only scratch the surface in this short article. For example, in the first parable of Luke 15 (the Lost Sheep), the Pharisees and teachers of the law are encouraged to see themselves as the shepherd, meaning that by the Prodigal Son they should logically be thinking they are the father! This makes for a very powerful rug pull, since they are actually more like the sassy older brother! Then as we move into the Shrewd Manager, “a certain man” is again mentioned, with Jesus turning to speak to his disciples, even though the religious leaders are clearly still present. Are they meant to think the manager is God, or (as just mentioned) the religious leaders of their day, since the key agent from the Lost Sheep onwards has been these leaders? In a fascinating affirmation of all this, the expression “a certain man was rich” (Ἄνθρωπός τις ἦν πλούσιος) of 16:1 is repeated word-for-word in 16:19, describing the man who neglected Lazarus and went to a tormented afterlife. This suggests that at least by 16:19 the main agent is not God, but the religious leaders who loved money (16:14). So, there are powerful rhetorical twists happening throughout Luke 15–16. In what follows we will see what happens when we read the Parable of the Shrewd Manager in light of the Parable of the Prodigal Son, noting a deliberate contrast between two social systems, in short, two different ethical (business) models of the ancient world.

What are some clues that suggest these two stories might be connected? What they immediately have in common is that both present systems of care—albeit two different systems—two systems of “business”, two social frameworks, even (we might say), two different ethical outlooks. The two different systems represent different outlooks in the ancient world, a Judeo-Christian system and a pagan one. They were not entirely contradictory, but they were clearly not the same either. Readers here are referred to two important books at the end of this article, two technical works which may help clarify the way the Judeo-Christian world thought of ethics versus the way the pagans typically thought.

In the Judeo-Christian system, God and therefore all responsible agents under him, were to be like the caring father; they were to have heart. This is exactly what we find in the Parable of the Prodigal Son. The one who holds the cards is the father. He is the loving one, and the older brother (though failing) ought to do the same. Notice that the father is not in the business of sending people away, he is not in the business of excluding those looking to him. In this story the youngest son decides of his own accord to break with societal and familial ties and go his own way. Contrast the situation in the second parable where the key agent is a business owner not a father, only too willing to fire his subordinates with no thought to their fate.

But back to the parable of the prodigal son. What happens when the younger son gets impoverished? He lands in a business scenario, which isn’t pretty! No one cares for him. He is not exactly a beggar. We are told he is working, or at least has “volunteered” for a wealthy “friend”. He is feeding their pigs. But in the midst of this, he self-portrays as a beggar, as he bemoans that there is no reciprocity, no one even gave him anything to eat (15:16). This is the harsh reality of the ancient Mediterranean world outside “family”. His situation is similar to the what the shrewd manager’s fears he will soon become. He is too proud to beg (16:3)! But again, concerning the younger son, as he contemplates how it is with the hirelings of his father’s home, he notes that even they are cared for, even though they are not family (15:17). Here we are starting to understand the difference between the systems. One is relational, one has personal care for the entire person. One cares for their outcome, even while allowing people to remain responsible. The other is a stark system which does not see itself as having any relational responsibility.

Let us double down for a minute on this idea of reciprocity under the more worldly system. One only gets what one earns, leveraging others to then get back from them. This is how the older brother sees everything. And similarly, in the next parable, the shrewd manager’s only option is to leverage the debts of the clients in order that he might become “friends”, to save his skin. This is important, especially considering how this section climaxes: “The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus” (16:14).

Let’s begin to tie this into what we often see in the world today. If we go back to the two examples given at the opening of this article, the inventor does not need to be paid because he has no agreement, so there was no obligation for reciprocity. The fired workers were under no obligation to maintain confidentiality. “It’s just business.” It’s pure legality, it’s about reciprocity. And why not? But when we note the two parables in question, with their contrasting elements, we begin to see that perhaps the harsh way is not God’s way.

We are beginning to navigate dangerous waters. Should Christians apply Christian principles outside the church to a fallen world? We must be careful, because in my opinion Jesus’s warning not to place pearls before swine in Matthew 7 is a warning against applying “Hesedism” one-to-one to unbelievers. Actually, if we try to apply Hesedism directly (Jesus warns), our generosity will be trampled and we will be consumed (Matt. 7:6)!

But this then makes Jesus’s application of the Parable of the Shrewd Manager to his disciples all the more powerful. He basically tells them to be as shrewd about money as the manager, recognizing that the world necessarily sees things in terms of reciprocity, but that Christians should leverage this to win friends for the kingdom! Here things come full circle, drawing us back towards ‘Hesedism’, but with bite. If Christians use wealth wisely to win friends, we may end up with radical acts of kindness, leading people to God, potentially turning the world upside down!

Note then an important book that has become foundational for the Economics of Mutuality Alliance (EOM), Colin Mayer’s Prosperity (2018). In 1970, The New York Times Magazine published an article by Milton Friedman where he wrote: “there is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engage in open and free competition without deception or fraud”. This idea become known as “Friedman doctrine.” Within a competitive marketplace, making a profit is always the goal, the only guard rails being the law. The board of directors of any public company has one “ethical” obligation: to maximize profits for shareholders. And the CEO has only one overarching “moral” responsibility: to be answerable to the shareholders, so that within the parameters of business law, he or she must maximize profits.

But Mayer (extraordinarily) suggests that Friedman doctrine is wrong, since case studies show that the most successful companies operate with larger (Christian-like) principles in mind.  The most successful businesses, Mayer states, are conscious of the good of their suppliers, their workers, their customers and from here even the world at large. Mayer’s seemingly radical stance is that business can be a means of good:

Economics errs in drawing an incomplete set of prescriptions of what enhances people’s well-being. It focuses on individualism when the purpose of life derives from community. It suggests that the purpose of work is to earn and survive when it is also to participate and contribute. It suggests that consumption is desirable when production is sought. It suggests that the accumulation of wealth is a primary objective when its production and disposal are of greatest significance. We derive well-being from a sense of purpose, achievement, and contribution not just profit, income and consumption. We seek to fulfil larger goals and the importance of the corporation is in its ability to assist us in this. We once constructed temples, pyramids, and shrines to satisfy the gods, but we now make washing machines, cell phones and movies that contribute to our material more than our spiritual well-being (Prosperity, 11).

Again, we must be careful here not to draw direct one-to-one comparisons as Christians. Several authors have argued correctly (in my opinion) that since no later than with the emergence of Marxism, there has been an attempt to create “Christianized” secular systems, systems having no need for God, but still applying the best of the Bible. What Jesus says in Luke 15–16 is different. He is saying that everything must come back to God and a focus on a future day of reckoning. Hesedism can still operate within systems of reciprocity and can be wonderfully and radically successful. But this is all to commend God. And yet it must be noted that in the above quote at least, Mayer is clearly aware of the importance of spiritual elements and the problem of modern societies losing them.

The bigger theme here, in the words of Jesus, which Mayer also points to, is that there is more to business than material things. There is more to life than making money. So what is cool is that even within secular business studies there is a recognition that Hesedism ‘works.’ As Jesus clearly taught, there must be ‘heart’ within the way businesses run. Money (of course) is a crucial commodity, which Jesus acknowledges. But to put it above God turns it into a god, which then demand all kinds of wrong things from people. This is the problem with Friedman’s doctrine, something also seen in the thinking of the rich master and rich man, and yet something exposed to be more complex, based even on the shrewdness of the manager.

As good as it would be to address the nitty gritty practicalities of business ethics we will limit ourselves here to considering five applications from Luke 15–16 before concluding:

1. Redefining Corporate Success

Many businesses operate on the assumption that success equals profit, and only profit. But Luke 15–16 challenges this. The Parable of the Prodigal Son presents a household where success is defined by restored relationships. In practice, Christian business leaders might define success more holistically: employee wellbeing, environmental stewardship, community impact, and long-term trust.

2. Restructuring Human Resources

In the Parable of the Shrewd Manager, the manager faces sudden dismissal without concern for his future—just like many in today’s workforce. “It’s just business,” we hear as layoffs happen without transitional support or dignity. In contrast, Hesedism calls for care. Christian-led companies might offer robust severance packages, transition coaching, or even in-house re-skilling programs, reflecting the father’s heart in the Prodigal story, compassion for those who have “failed.”

3. Embedding Ethical “Creativity”

The shrewd manager is commended for being clever, not corrupt. Jesus isn’t advocating for dishonesty but wise, redemptive use of worldly systems for kingdom ends. In business, this might look like structuring deals that prioritize mutual benefit or negotiating contracts with flexibility for small or vulnerable partners. Here, ethical creativity becomes a core competency.

4. Building a Culture of Redemption

Too often, businesses mirror the older brother’s spirit, i.e., cold, rule-bound, and unwilling to forgive failure. Hesedism flips this. A Christian business might institute policies that promote second chances, for example, fair-chance hiring for formerly incarcerated individuals, or restorative performance reviews helping employees grow rather than fearing retrenchment. It’s about creating a culture where people are not merely resources, but humans capable of redemption.

5. Using Wealth for Eternal Influence

Jesus’ strange call to use “worldly wealth to gain friends” (Luke 16:9) becomes radical when re-read through the lens of Hesedism. Christian entrepreneurs and investors can intentionally deploy capital to support social ventures, fund startups solving systemic injustices, or back products that serve marginalized communities. This isn’t philanthropy after profit—it’s investing with a kingdom-first mindset from the start. The goal is not merely influence, but eternal impact.

Imagine a world where the phrase “It’s just business” no longer signals cold detachment, but deep, sacrificial love—the kind that mirrors a father running to embrace a lost child. Luke 15–16 invites us to see that business, like all human endeavor, is deeply theological. It’s a battleground of competing ethics, a space where either reciprocity or grace dominates. And yet Jesus does not call us to naïveté. He calls us to shrewdness, infused with compassion, wisdom coupled with mercy.

If Christians embrace this vision, the workplace becomes more than a place of profit; it becomes a place of witness. The boardroom becomes a pulpit. The spreadsheet becomes a canvas for kingdom values. And perhaps then, just maybe, someone might look at your company, your leadership, your decisions, and say with joy—not cynicism—“It’s just business,” and mean it in the best way possible.