Continuing the themes of hope for the “lost” from God (Luke 15) and hope in God being more wealth-creating than material goods (Luke 16), the parables of Luke 17 give us positive role models of hope and trust in God.

These studies cover the writings by the closest shelakhim (apostles) of Yeshua haMashiakh (Jesus the Christ). Commonly called the “New Testament,” this standard canon includes the four Gospels, the letters and the Apocalypse (Revelation).
Continuing the themes of hope for the “lost” from God (Luke 15) and hope in God being more wealth-creating than material goods (Luke 16), the parables of Luke 17 give us positive role models of hope and trust in God.
How do we explain to others about being “under grace” and still obey the Torah? Are we “under grace” or “under law”? Paul explains this in his letter to the Romans.
The overall theme of Luke 16 is how we are to use material wealth. Is Luke 16:19–31, known as “the rich man and Lazarus,” a travelogue of hell or a parable related to wealth?
This passage has three seemingly distinct teachings — parable of the shrewd manager, whether the Law and Prophets stopped with Yokhanan the Baptizer and a “one-liner” on divorce — but all of them as well as the parable that follows of the rich man and Lazar deal with one topic: God as Master or wealth as Master.
This chapter covers a central theme via the interrelated parables of the lost sheep, lost coin and lost son: The Son of God was sent to “find” and “bring back” the “lost sheep” of Israel. With the soon approach of the annual Lamb Selection Day for Passover — 10th day of the first month of God’s calendar — it’s fitting to note God’s “tale of three lambs” in Luke 15 and throughout Scripture
At Passover time, I feel a close connection to the death and sacrifice of Yeshua. God gives us millions of chances to repent and come back. That grace and opportunity comes from Yeshua’s sacrifice.
At the beginning of a chapter with three parables about God’s seeking to bring back to the Kingdom of God those who are “lost,” Yeshua demonstrated how God makes the “unholy” “holy.”
We are in danger of making God’s name common and of no repute — i.e., “taking it in vain” — if we reject those who He is calling to Himself just because they don’t have the same understanding we have.