The story of Zacchaeus

When I was in primary school we were taught the saying, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me”. As the years have passed it has become clear to me that this is simply not true. Our descriptions about other people matter as do their descriptions of us.

In this edition, we are looking at the story of Zacchaeus who is the subject of name-calling and denigration.

The flow of the story goes something like this:

Jesus enters Jericho (v.1) his mission is directed towards those on the margins in keeping with his proclamation in the synagogue reported in Luke 4: 18 – 21.

We meet Zacchaeus (v. 2) He is a wealthy chief tax collector, and we are also told that he is short in stature. Before Zacchaeus says a single word, both the reader and the crowd have reason to make assumptions about him.

Zacchaeus is presented as someone deeply interested in Jesus (vs 3). He was trying to see who Jesus was.

Zacchaeus breaks social rules (v. 4) he’s a tax collector who is willing to climb a tree like a young boy.

Jesus seeks out Zacchaeus (v. 5). Jesus stops beneath the tree, looks up, calls Zacchaeus by name and insists on staying at his house.

The crowd does not respond well (vs. 6 and 7). Zacchaeus is overjoyed with the chance to meet Jesus but the crowd grumbles. They turn their spite from Zacchaeus to Jesus.

We will jump over verse 8 for now. In verse 9, Jesus affirms Zacchaeus. He is described as “a son of Abraham."

So, what is happening in verse 8 and 10.

There is important scholarly debate about verse 8 because of the translation from the original Greek into English. The issue centres on the verbs in Luke 19:8: "Behold, Lord, the half of my possessions I give to the poor, and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold." In Greek the verbs are δίδωμι (didōmi) - "I give" and ἀποδίδωμι (apodidōmi) — "I restore". Both are present indicative verbs, not future ("I will give") or subjunctive ("I would give").

While many English translations present Zacchaeus as making new promises, a growing number of scholars argue that the Greek is better understood as describing his existing pattern of life, not making new promises. Jesus enables the truth about Zacchaeus’ life to be told. The crowd and history tell us that Zacchaeus is truly and fully seen by Jesus. Zacchaeus has been the subject of name-calling which has diminished him in other people’s eyes. That is not how he is seen by God.

This contrasts with a reading that emphasises the encounter with Jesus as a conversion moment.

We are then required to engage with verse 10, where Jesus says, "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost". So, who are the lost in this context. It might be Zacchaeus but given the crowds response, perhaps it is them – the people who cannot see and welcome Jesus for who he is; the people who cannot understand that the love which Jesus embodies accepts people that societies and cultures can name as unacceptable.

While tradition has been focussed on when and how Zacchaeus was converted, it is possibly the wrong question. The challenge is to ask whom we have already decided is beyond God's welcome. We are remarkably quick to name people by their failures, occupations, politics, wealth, poverty, or past. Jesus names people differently. He calls Zacchaeus "a son of Abraham". He calls the woman who had bled for twelve years "a daughter of Abraham". Every one of us is more than the labels people want to suggest for us. The question Luke leaves with his audience is whether we will continue to see people through the names their culture gives them, or through the eyes of Christ. That is our question today.