Puzzling the Parables of Jesus

Methods and Interpretation

Ruben Zimmermann, Ruben Zimmermann

• Publisher: Fortress Press
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9780800699758
• eBook ISBN: 9781451465327
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

Modern scholarship on the parables has long been preoccupied with asking what Jesus himself said and what he intended to accomplish with his parables. Ruben Zimmermann moves beyond that agenda to explore the dynamics of parabolic speech in all their rich complexity. Introductory chapters address the history of research and distinguish historical from literary and reader-oriented approaches, then set out a postmodern hermeneutic that analyzes narrative elements and context, maps the sociohistorical background, explores stock metaphors and symbols, and opens up contemporary horizons of interpretation. Subsequent chapters then focus on one parable from early Christian sources (Q, Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and the Gospel of Thomas) to explore how parables function in each literary context. Over all reigns the principle that the meaning or theological "message" of a parable cannot be extracted from the parabolic form; thus the parables continue to invite hearers' and readers' involvement to the present day.

2

How to Interpret a Parable

6

Reading and Analyzing Parables

In the second part of this book, I provide some examples of parable interpretation. In doing so I take up the historical, literary, and reader-oriented aspects that have been explored in the first part of this monograph. The different perspectives on how one is to approach the parables will be brought together to form an integrative method of parable analysis. Accordingly, the first chapter within this section offers a methodological guideline for how to do parable interpretation, which can be applied to every parable in early Christianity and beyond. I provide one example of parable exegesis in each main source of early Christianity to demonstrate how this method works, and at the same time, I offer exemplary interpretations of selected parables for use in the classroom. First, the field as a whole must be demarcated.

Mapping the Field: Exploring the Diversity of Jesus’ Parables

Jesus’ parables are diverse. Depending on how one defines a parable, it is difficult even to determine exactly how many parables exist. Adolf Jülicher identified and analyzed fifty-two texts.^[1] Rudolf Bultmann listed forty-six parable texts in his Formgeschichte.^[2] Joachim Jeremias identified forty-one parables.^[3] Otto Knoch listed thirty-six texts, though four of these are double parables, resulting in a total of forty parables.^[4] Bernard Brandon Scott commented on thirty-one parables,^[5] while Arland Hultgren classified thirty-eight texts as parables.^[6] Valda Charles Morgan listed eighty-six parables in his collection of Jesus parables in English translation.^[7] Klyne Snodgrass analyzed thirty parables in his extensive book.^[8] In the Kompendium der Gleichnisse Jesu we listed 104 parables with our own commentary, including several parables from the agrapha, the Gospel of Thomas, and the Gospel of John. In some cases we analyzed parallel transmissions separately (feast: Matt. 22:1–14; Luke 14:12–24; fishing net/fishermen: Matt. 13:47–50; Gos. Thom. 8; thief: Q 12:39–40; Agraphon 45; sows/desecration: Matt. 7:6; Agraphon 45).

The deviation in the numbers is due, on the one hand, to varying evaluations of the genre as the shorter parables, which Bultmann labels metaphors or Bildworte, are often not perceived as parables. On the other hand, how one evaluates parallel transmissions and selects the sources also leads to differing numbers of parables. In some cases the so-called “double parables” are dealt with together (Matt. 13:44–46: treasure and pearl; Luke 14:28–33: tower building and military campaign). It becomes clear that it makes little sense to try to set forth a fixed and absolute number of parables because these decisions are affected by specific interests, be they historical (what is an authentic Jesus parable?) or literary (what is a parable?), that lead in a particular direction.

Instead we should ask how this diversity of parables can be captured systematically. Are there criteria according to which the parables can be divided into smaller groups? Scholarship often distinguishes between formal and textual aspects. In his analytical second book, Jülicher categorized the parables according to the genres he had introduced previously: “Gleichnis im engeren Sinn,” “Parabel,” and “Beispielerzählung.”^[9] Categorization according to linguistic criteria is also popular, whether according to specific introductions such as τίς ἐξ ὑμῶν (who among you; Q 11:11; 12:25; Luke 11:5; 14:28; 17:7), or the collocation ἄνθρωπος τις (a person; see Q 19:12; Luke 10:30; 14:16; 15:11; 16:1, 19; see Luke 20:9), or a combination of both: τίς ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ὑμῶν (which person among you; Luke 15:4; see Matt. 12:11). It is also possible to organize parables according to a particular comparative formula, either with the particle ὡς (as in Mark 4:26, 31; see John 15:6) or ὥσπερ (as in Luke 17:24; Matt. 13:40; 25:32), with the collocation ὅμοιός ἐστιν (… is the same as …, Q 6:48–49; 7:32; Luke 12:36; Matt. 13:52 etc.), or with derivatives of the verb ὁμοιόω (compare: Q 7:31; 13:18; 13:20: ὁμοιώσω; Matt. 13:24; 18:23; 22:2: ὡμοιώθη; Matt. 7:24, 26; 25:1: ὁμοιωθήσεται).

In another variation, the number of characters involved in the plot determines the categorization as two-person parables (Luke 12:16–21; 16:1–8; 18:1–9) or three-person parables (Matt. 18:23–35; 20:1–16; 22:1–10; 25:1–13, 14–30; Mark 12:1–2; Luke 10:29–37; 15:11–32; 16:1–13, 19–31).^[10] In these cases, the character constellation often contains an antithetical couple (two sons, debtors, wanderers) in opposition to a third person (Luke 7:41–42; 10:30–35; 15:11–32).^[11] According to Craig Blomberg, the number of main characters is closely linked to the main points made by the parable. Therefore, he arranges the material according to “Simple Three-Point-Parables,” “Complex Three-Point Parables,” and “Two-Point & One-Point Parables.”^[12]

Another possibility would be to differentiate according to the group characters or even the real addressees on the macro-level of the text, such as the opponent parables (e.g., Mark 12:1–12), the apostle parables (Luke 12:41–48), or the parables addressed to the congregation (Matt. 18).

Cases in which two different figurative domains are closely connected and have a parallel structure so that one assumes a linguistic unity have been referred to as twin or double parables. The parables of the treasure and the pearl (Matt. 13:44–46), the tower construction and the military campaign (Luke 14:28–32), or the children in the marketplace (Q 7:31–35) belong to this group. In the scholarly literature, thematic units such as the mustard seed and yeast (Q 13:20; Mark 4:30–32), the weeds and the fishing net (Matt. 13:24–30:47–50), and the lost sheep and the lost coin (Luke 15:4–10) are regarded as double parables although the attribution cannot be supported linguistically quite as clearly or with a tight argument. We can also identify a series of so-called double metaphors (Doppelbildworte) in which two differing figurative domains are closely aligned.^[13] In such cases, the presence of some narrative elements allow a grouping with the parables (e.g., the mending and the wineskin, Mark 2:21–22 or the lamp and the measure, Mark 4:21–25), although in some cases they are pure metaphors (e.g., salt and light, Matt. 5:13–14; pupil and slave, Matt. 10:24–25).

Via created a thematically oriented grouping that distinguishes between parables with a “tragic” outcome, such as Matt. 18:23–25; 22:1–3,^[14] and “comic” parables with a happy outcome, such as Matt. 10:1–16; Luke 16:1–8.^[15] Crossan also distinguished parables along the lines of certain themes, grouping them under the headings “Kingdom-of-God parables,” “advent parables,” “reversal parables,” as well as ethical “parables of action.”^[16]

In an attempt to make such thematic categories more precise, we can, in my opinion, differentiate between groupings according to figurative domains and groupings according to reference domains. In a classification according to the images used in the parables, the figurative source domain determines the thematic classification (more on this below). In this way we can put parables of growth (e.g., Mark 4:26–29; Matt. 13:24–30; John 12:24), parables of harvest (Q 6:43–45; 10:2; 12:24; John 4:35–38; Gos. Thom. 63), servant or slave parables (Q 12:42–46; Mark 13:33–37; Luke 17:7–10; Matt. 18:23–35), wedding parables (e.g., Mark 2:18–20; Luke 14:7–11; Matt. 22:1–14; 25:1–13), and animal parables (Matt. 7:6; 13:47–48; John 10:1–5; Gos. Thom. 47:1; agrapha 164, 207) into their own individual groups.

In the scholarly literature, even larger units are formed, for example by sorting out nature or social parables. Scott groups the material into three large sections: a) family, village, city, and beyond; b) masters and servants; c) home and farm.^[17] Shillington suggests a different thematic grouping, building thematic blocks under the headings “parables of the temple,” “parables of the land,” “parables of the economy,” and “parables of the people.”^[18]

On the other hand, reference domains generate structure when the target domain (see below) is the bond unifying differing parables. The best known of these is the grouping of the so-called kingdom-of-God parables, in most of which the classification of the narrative into the kingdom of God is given in the introduction, such as in Q 13:20: τίνι ὁμοιώσω τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ (with what should I compare the kingdom of God?). A large number of texts explicitly name the kingdom of God as the field of reference (Q 13:20; Mark 4:26–29; 4:30–32; Matt. 13:24–30; 13:44–46; 13:47–50; 13:52; 18:23–35; 20:1–13; 21:28–32; 22:1–14; 25:1–13, 32–33; John 3:3–5; Gos. Thom. 22, 64, 97, 98).

At the same time, in view of the sheer amount of material, it would be incorrect to regard the kingdom of God as the only or even the primary reference domain. Further, it would be a mistake to make a diachronic assumption in classifying the kingdom-of-God parables as the oldest material or material of the historical Jesus. The textual evidence alone, in which especially in the oldest sources (Mark and Q) such a grouping seldom happens, refutes such an evaluation.^[19]

Other less-prominent groupings according to reference domains have also been created in the collection of the so-called crisis parables (Luke 10:30–35; 13:6–9; 15:1–7, 8–10, 11–25), parousia parables (Q 12:39–40; 19:12–26; Matt....

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Table Of Contents
• Preface and Acknowledgments
• Three Approaches to Parables
• How to Interpret a Parable
• Literature
• Index of Names and Subjects
• Index of Ancient Texts