Similar. No single passage can be correctly understood apart from all else that scripture says on the matter, and any attempt to understand the given passage outside of its local and global contexts will lead to error.
I would start with an understanding of Jesus' immediate audience and the theme of the immediately surrounding text, followed by a study of scripture's use of "shrewd" and "shrewdness."
Here are the question or thoughts I have about this passage:
1. It's not clear that the manager has done anything wrong. The owner comes to him with a complaint that he has "heard" the manager was squandering his property. Nonetheless, if he hasn't done anything wrong it would seem he would just give an accounting and be done with it.
2. What is the manager reducing? Is it the interest? Is it the manager's cut? Is it from the principle (i.e. simply "the debt")? We aren't told. How we answer that question may affect our reading of why the owner finds the manager's actions to be shrewd. In spite of the fact that there were laws against usury, there were ways to evade them as found in the Mishna. So, you know, humans.
3. If the manager is reducing the interest, then the owner hasn't lost any principle but has still lost profit. If the manager is reducing his cut, then the owner hasn't lost anything (this may be the best option). If he is reducing the principle, the owner is again losing profit. Why is the manager not upset? That would be the expectation, I would think. If it were me, I wouldn't commend the manager for causing me to lose profit, would I?
4. By reducing the debts the manger ingratiates the debtors to whom? Himself? The owner? The text indicates that by reducing the debts the manager ingratiates the debtors to himself. In other words, they now owe him a "debt." And so, if he loses his job they will take him in.
But, it can also be argued that the manager, by reducing the debts, also engratiates the debtors to the owner. If we allow for this, then we have what we need to explain why he commends to manager. Keep in mind the role that honor and shame play in this culture. In some ways honor was more valuable than wealth. In fact, one reason to increase one's wealth was to increase the honor for one's self and one's family. By reducing the debt the manager is increasing the honor of the owner. So, now, if he fires the manager and then insists that the debtors repay the original amount, he will loose the honor he has gained, and he won't want to do that. Pretty shrewd, right?
5. Why does the owner commend the manager for his shrewdness? It may be for reasons stated in #4. On the other hand, if the manager reduced the owner's principle (i.e. "the debt"), one would expect the owner to upset. If the manager reduced his own cut, then why would the owner care one way or the other.
The reason for why the owner commends the manager for being shrewd is not easy to answer. We end up having to add something not given in the text, probably something those who originally heard the parable would have understood. I do think the role of shame and honor in that culture are playing a part. But, some have argued he commends him simply because he reduced the debt and engrataiated the debtors to himself. That makes some sense, as well. But, again, why commend the manager? Just fire him.
6. The question as why the owner commends the manager affects how we interpret Jesus's recommendation in vs. 9. Jesus states that the children of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the children of light. That doesn't read like a compliment to the children of light. So, what is recommendataion that Jesus is making in vs. 9? He seems to recommending that they be shrewd with money? But, how?
How does his recommendation that the children of light use dishonest or "worldly" wealth to make friends who will welcome them into eternal homes relate to the parable? Are we to be dishonest? Was the manager being dishonest? That question is still up in the air. If he reduced his own debt, not much is dishonest about that. Of course, Jesus is not asking his followers to be dishonest, but what is it about the parable that his followers should be gleaning. Is it simply that the manager is an example of being shrewd that is not often found among the children of light? What does that mean? Well, the parable is supposed to explain it.
So, what is he recommending? The word being translated "shrewd" is
phronimos from the world
phronesis. It can be translated "wise" or "prudent" and is mostly associated with practicle wisdom, which makes sense in light of the parable. What is it about the children of light that they don't always exhibit practicle wisdom in relation to the "children of this age?" That seems to me an important question, and it goes back to what we can glean from the parable.
Vs. 9, is notoriously difficult to both translate and interpret. Is it simply worldly money (i.e. any money) or is it money dishonestly gained. How are we to use it to make friends who will welcome us into eternal homes? What does that even mean? Surely, Jesus is not recommending some kind of works righteousness, is he?
I agree with you that "shrewd" is the key to this passage. What kind of shrewdness or practical wisdom is Jesus recommending? How we interpret the parable and vs. 9 is going to affect our reading. I challenge you to read six or seven commentaries on this passage and see just how many different approaches there are to this parable. This is why I posted it, to hear what others think.
