Interesting question and scripture doesn’t tell us. He did promise to correct the abuses but never said he would resign from the job itself. If I were going to guess (and that is all it is) I would use Luke 3:12–13 as a basis for it.
When tax collectors asked John what repentance required, he didn’t tell them to resign. He said to collect no more than they were authorized to. So the job wasn’t the issue… it was the abuse of the position.
I am 4'8", so if anyone can appreciate him being short, it is me. ;) But it is one of my favorite stories because of what you point out here -- the worst, redeemed. I think of it now like this: https://youtu.be/9vguZaan6XE?is=B_gurof7XbjbIV_S
Have you ever thought about this? Zacchaeus was likely bullied horribly bad while growing up in that culture and counted as an outcast because of his short stature. So, the only way he could reach out and strike back at the community was to join hands with rulers of the day and take tax money. He is was probably a despised bitter man at heart and all those cutting comments rang over and over in his head daily. Until, Jesus came along and healed his wounded heart!
Only Doctor Luke mentions this account in the gospels. He may have very well been acquainted with him and knew his backstory. Everyone has a backstory!
You also missed something interesting. Luke 18 not only gives the story of the rich man. It also give the parable comparing the Pharisee and the publican prayers before God. This prepared the disciples for Zacchaeus. And saying that he was a child of Abraham is more than just asserting his lineage. It asserted that this man was a believer, made righteous as Abraham was righteous because he believed. Unlike the rich man in Luke 18, Zacchaeus belied that Jesus was the Messiah.
Thank you for this excellent teaching. May I ask your feelings on reading "son of Abraham" through the lens of Genesis 18:19, Abraham did what was right and just, in Hebrew Mishpat and Tzedekah, Zacchaeus pledges to do what is just and right, and in that way is a "son of Abraham." I always want to verify something I hear before passing it on, I can tell you are a careful scholar.
Thank you so much! And you asked a really good question, and I like where you’re going with it.
Genesis 18:19 is such a key verse for understanding Abraham, especially the emphasis on righteousness and justice. And I do think Zacchaeus’ response reflects something real there. What he does does look like someone who’s been brought back into alignment with what is right.
Where I’d push back just a bit is making that the reason Jesus calls him a “son of Abraham.”
In Luke 19, it feels like Jesus is naming identity before anything else. Especially in a moment where Zacchaeus would have been seen as outside of that identity because of who he was and how he lived.
So I’d probably frame it like this... what Zacchaeus does matters, but it reads more like the fruit of restoration than the basis for it. Does that make sense?
And I really appreciate the way you’re thinking this through and wanting to check it before passing it on. That kind of care with the text is so incredibly important.
"Grace that only goes to the deserving is not grace. It is a merit system with better branding." Powerful. It seems we want people to become our perception of Christian before they encounter Christ. We argue with them to prove us right and them wrong. We may "win" the argument or silent the dissent, but the soul is the victim because it never experiences worth. Last time I checked Romans, it said that while we were enemies, Christ died for us. I think we may have lost that vision.
Yes!! It is like expecting people who aren't in your family to obey the rules of your household. They are not in the family! When they become family THEN we can expect them to obey the family rules. To expect that of people outside the family is just not realistic. We need to focus more on bringing them into the family rather than forcing them to conform to the rules.
“Grace that only goes to the deserving is not grace. It is a merit system with better branding.
The crowd grumbled because they had a theology that said blessing flows toward those who earn it and away from those who don’t. Yeshua had a different theology entirely. He came to seek the lost… not to reward the found.“
Thank you. No incident can be taken by itself in scripture and Zaccheus contrasts with the rich ruler in chapter 18 who found out he didn't keep the law. Interesting to note "defraud" is the same word in Greek used in the Septuagint in Leviticus 19:11. This links up nicely with the Torah restitution. Luke's gospel often covers the theme of stewardship and bearing in mind the gospel emphasises the humanity of Christ
Yes, it is the goodness of God that leads to repentance. However, just because Zaccheus was rich doesn't mean he got it by cheating. He could have inherited it. Being small may be the reason he became a tax collector. He got status albeit not in a popular way. Also by simply doing the sums, if his riches were gotten by by ill means he wouldn't have enough to repay. The word "if" is important. But all this doesn't alter the fact Christ is seeking the lost. The story says more about Him than Zaccheus, which is what the Gospel is for .
I agree with you that the heart of the story is Yeshua seeking the lost, that’s clearly the main point. But I don’t think Zacchaeus’ situation is meant to be morally neutral either.
In that culture, being a “chief tax collector” and rich would already raise red flags for a Jewish audience, since that role was strongly associated with overcharging and exploitation. So while it’s possible some of his wealth came another way, the way Luke presents it seems intentional.
Also, the “if I have defrauded anyone” doesn’t necessarily imply uncertainty. In a Jewish context, that kind of wording can be a humble way of acknowledging guilt. And the fact that he offers fourfold repayment is significant. That’s not a casual gesture, it reflects serious restitution according to Torah.
So I’d say it’s both things together. The story reveals who Yeshua is as the one who seeks the lost, and it also shows what real repentance looks like, not just words, but making things right.
Sorry, I didn't finish the comment on stewardship which of course is seen perfectly in the Lord Jesus. The Zaccheus story reminds me that Christ restored what he did not steal - Psalm 69:4 the trespass offering Psalm.
I love this post, it digs into the miracle of grace and points to the flawed religiosity we easily fall into. Jesus's grace was scandalous. Keep posting!
Excellent work. Your writing is clear and captivating. I love how you present your insights. This is my first time here, but I'll be back. Blessings,
Thank you so much Pat!
The question is did Zacheeus stop tax collecting after having the dinner with Yeshua?
Interesting question and scripture doesn’t tell us. He did promise to correct the abuses but never said he would resign from the job itself. If I were going to guess (and that is all it is) I would use Luke 3:12–13 as a basis for it.
When tax collectors asked John what repentance required, he didn’t tell them to resign. He said to collect no more than they were authorized to. So the job wasn’t the issue… it was the abuse of the position.
Satisfying answer
I am 4'8", so if anyone can appreciate him being short, it is me. ;) But it is one of my favorite stories because of what you point out here -- the worst, redeemed. I think of it now like this: https://youtu.be/9vguZaan6XE?is=B_gurof7XbjbIV_S
This was great! I will never see this story the same way again. ☺️
Have you ever thought about this? Zacchaeus was likely bullied horribly bad while growing up in that culture and counted as an outcast because of his short stature. So, the only way he could reach out and strike back at the community was to join hands with rulers of the day and take tax money. He is was probably a despised bitter man at heart and all those cutting comments rang over and over in his head daily. Until, Jesus came along and healed his wounded heart!
Only Doctor Luke mentions this account in the gospels. He may have very well been acquainted with him and knew his backstory. Everyone has a backstory!
Yes they do!
That is most definitely a possibility!
You also missed something interesting. Luke 18 not only gives the story of the rich man. It also give the parable comparing the Pharisee and the publican prayers before God. This prepared the disciples for Zacchaeus. And saying that he was a child of Abraham is more than just asserting his lineage. It asserted that this man was a believer, made righteous as Abraham was righteous because he believed. Unlike the rich man in Luke 18, Zacchaeus belied that Jesus was the Messiah.
Excellent break down of it.
Thank you!!
Write on, She’s So Scripture! Grace is certainly amazing, most certainly scandalous! Thant you for a timely and biblically accurate reminder!
Thank you so much Don!
Thank you for this excellent teaching. May I ask your feelings on reading "son of Abraham" through the lens of Genesis 18:19, Abraham did what was right and just, in Hebrew Mishpat and Tzedekah, Zacchaeus pledges to do what is just and right, and in that way is a "son of Abraham." I always want to verify something I hear before passing it on, I can tell you are a careful scholar.
Thank you so much! And you asked a really good question, and I like where you’re going with it.
Genesis 18:19 is such a key verse for understanding Abraham, especially the emphasis on righteousness and justice. And I do think Zacchaeus’ response reflects something real there. What he does does look like someone who’s been brought back into alignment with what is right.
Where I’d push back just a bit is making that the reason Jesus calls him a “son of Abraham.”
In Luke 19, it feels like Jesus is naming identity before anything else. Especially in a moment where Zacchaeus would have been seen as outside of that identity because of who he was and how he lived.
So I’d probably frame it like this... what Zacchaeus does matters, but it reads more like the fruit of restoration than the basis for it. Does that make sense?
And I really appreciate the way you’re thinking this through and wanting to check it before passing it on. That kind of care with the text is so incredibly important.
"Grace that only goes to the deserving is not grace. It is a merit system with better branding." Powerful. It seems we want people to become our perception of Christian before they encounter Christ. We argue with them to prove us right and them wrong. We may "win" the argument or silent the dissent, but the soul is the victim because it never experiences worth. Last time I checked Romans, it said that while we were enemies, Christ died for us. I think we may have lost that vision.
Yes!! It is like expecting people who aren't in your family to obey the rules of your household. They are not in the family! When they become family THEN we can expect them to obey the family rules. To expect that of people outside the family is just not realistic. We need to focus more on bringing them into the family rather than forcing them to conform to the rules.
Thank you. I have shared this with my family and friends. Blessings from Australia
Thank you Irena!!
This was so good!
“Grace that only goes to the deserving is not grace. It is a merit system with better branding.
The crowd grumbled because they had a theology that said blessing flows toward those who earn it and away from those who don’t. Yeshua had a different theology entirely. He came to seek the lost… not to reward the found.“
I am so glad you enjoyed it!
It was so good. I can’t wait to read more of your work. God bless you.🙏
Thank you. No incident can be taken by itself in scripture and Zaccheus contrasts with the rich ruler in chapter 18 who found out he didn't keep the law. Interesting to note "defraud" is the same word in Greek used in the Septuagint in Leviticus 19:11. This links up nicely with the Torah restitution. Luke's gospel often covers the theme of stewardship and bearing in mind the gospel emphasises the humanity of Christ
Yes, it is the goodness of God that leads to repentance. However, just because Zaccheus was rich doesn't mean he got it by cheating. He could have inherited it. Being small may be the reason he became a tax collector. He got status albeit not in a popular way. Also by simply doing the sums, if his riches were gotten by by ill means he wouldn't have enough to repay. The word "if" is important. But all this doesn't alter the fact Christ is seeking the lost. The story says more about Him than Zaccheus, which is what the Gospel is for .
I agree with you that the heart of the story is Yeshua seeking the lost, that’s clearly the main point. But I don’t think Zacchaeus’ situation is meant to be morally neutral either.
In that culture, being a “chief tax collector” and rich would already raise red flags for a Jewish audience, since that role was strongly associated with overcharging and exploitation. So while it’s possible some of his wealth came another way, the way Luke presents it seems intentional.
Also, the “if I have defrauded anyone” doesn’t necessarily imply uncertainty. In a Jewish context, that kind of wording can be a humble way of acknowledging guilt. And the fact that he offers fourfold repayment is significant. That’s not a casual gesture, it reflects serious restitution according to Torah.
So I’d say it’s both things together. The story reveals who Yeshua is as the one who seeks the lost, and it also shows what real repentance looks like, not just words, but making things right.
Sorry, I didn't finish the comment on stewardship which of course is seen perfectly in the Lord Jesus. The Zaccheus story reminds me that Christ restored what he did not steal - Psalm 69:4 the trespass offering Psalm.
Your interpretation and explanation of this passage is totally correct. The story can't be understood without the cultural context. Thank you!
Thank you so much Mary!
I love this post, it digs into the miracle of grace and points to the flawed religiosity we easily fall into. Jesus's grace was scandalous. Keep posting!
Thank you so much Gretchen!!