The redactional and tradition-historical evolution of the texts can shed some light on the changing context, and the changing scope of a teaching uttered by Jesus. I chose a parable that caused considerate turbulence among New Testament scholars and still does not have a satisfying solution to its meaning, the Parable of the Unjust Steward in Luke 16,1-13. The original parable, that reflects the first Century A.D. Palestinian context, has an application in verses 11-13 that undoubtedly shifts the original meaning: Though the parable itself does not speak of the “righteous use of money, the Lucan interpretation shifts the intention of the text to this direction. An even more perplexing question is still to be answered, that is, whether the crucial verse 10 belongs to the original parable or must be taken as secondary inclusion. If verse 10 is a later development, the parable becomes even more frustrating, because no summarium is given. The corruption of the stakeholders were commonsense in Roman times, and Jesus builds on that certain topos, but makes a surprising twist, without releasing the hearer from the frustration of the moral tension inherent in the text. Although the original parable reflects a Palestinian milieu and might answer a question of a “would be disciple”, the reworking of Luke is more to a gentile and diaspora Jewish audience, and the rationale of the text becomes focused on the correct dealing with monetary funds.