What's the interpretation of Lk:17:7-9

[tyroneweaver]

I'm having trouble filtering it

 

[HaShev]

Think about the things relating to that topic today. How do you treat the servants?
You have people who ask a lot of the Military and Police who serve, but they mistreat those serving us, (hence the football protest debate) . Look at all I have done in service and how I get treated...I am despised and like a lepper.
Son of man does not come to be served, but to serve you(Matt 20:28, Mark10:45), and your treatment of those who serve results in how well you are served.

We are embarking on some tough battles due to complacency and kicking things down the road to future generations, so now is not the time to disrespect those who serve and protect and watch over us.

 

[The Professor]

Some versions of the Bible are somewhat confusing; however, I believe the New English Translation explains it fairly well (verse numbers removed for easier reading):

“Would any one of you say to your slave who comes in from the field after plowing or shepherding sheep, ‘Come at once and sit down for a meal’? Won’t the master instead say to him, ‘Get my dinner ready, and make yourself ready to serve me while I eat and drink. Then you may eat and drink’? He won’t thank the slave because he did what he was told, will he? So you too, when you have done everything you were commanded to do, should say, ‘We are slaves undeserving of special praise; we have only done what was our duty’” (Luke 17:7-10).

 

[Picaro]

It seems to be a parable on several levels pointing out work/virtue/faith are their own rewards in themselves, and he's telling the Apostles they already know the answers when they're asking for definitive answers to remove their own doubts. They aren't entitled to any special higher knowledge for merely doing their jobs as Apostles. this logic is easily extended to higher and more general levels of commentary. If they desire greater 'faith', they need to work for it; they're being 'slackers' if they need greater faith handed to them. This seems to be the opinions of many scholars, anyway. Like all such verses, they mean little when the preceding verses are not taken into account. Like a 'seed', their faith will grow 'normally' in due time, and he wasn't going to turn them instantly into full grown 'plants' just to make it easier for them. Plenty of symbolic pointers in the parable to other meanings implied. Compare the 'meal' in 17:1-10 to the the attacks on lawyers in 11:37-54 and the advice in 17:3-4. There are several meanings, not just one.

Some comments from a study of the chiastic structure of 'Q' and Luke here on where 17:1-10 fits.

Q 11:37 – 12:12 and 17:1-10: Israel’s Failed Leadership. We have already argued that Luke 11:53-54 is a Lukan conclusion to the Q passage and was not in Q. Therefore, Q 11:37 –12:12 was originally one periscope rather than two. Both this passage and Q 17:1-10 begin with
woes, each set of woes concluding with how the censured has been the downfall of others (11:44, 52; 17:2) and therefore severe judgment is announced (11:50; 17:2). In both passages these woes are immediately followed by the phrase προσέχετε ἑαυτοῖς. The word προσέχω occurs nowhere else in Q. Q 11:37 – 12:12 continues with an exhortation to fear God and acknowledge him before men, while Q 17:1-10 continues with an exhortation to put faith in God and serve him freely.

http://reconstructingq.com/chiasm.pdf