Nobody posted anything today, so I may as well continue my reflections on the parables. I’ve had a busy day today, but I have about an hour of free time while the rest of the family watches Lost. I’m almost finished with the end of the third season, but not quite. By next week I should be caught up.
In my first post I noted that the parables of Jesus were not simply illustrative stories. They are really nothing like the kind of simple, homely illustrations that preachers often use to explain difficult concepts to their congregations. Just to be clear: there’s nothing wrong with illustrating one’s sermonic statements. Nothing at all. That’s just not what the parables of Jesus are. Parables are more mysterious than that.
The meaning of the word “parable” is somewhat elastic in the Scriptures. The word “parable” refers to a teaching device whereby two things are compared. It can refer to proverbs, wisdom oracles, fables, allegories, riddles, and even dark enigmatic sayings. We have to determine its meaning from its usage.
When the word appears on Jesus lips, it already has a frame of reference, a history. What might that be? The Hebrew Scriptures. The few examples of “parables” (mashal) in the old creation are very revealing.
We’ll start with Matthew’s quotation of Psalm 78 in Matthew 13:34-35. Matthew says: “All these things Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed, he said nothing to them without a parable. This was to fulfill what was spoke by the prophet:
I will open my mouth in parables;
I will utter what has been hidden
since the foundation of the world.”
Asaph begins begins Psalm 78, a long historical song, with the words: “I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old” and then he proceeds to recount the rebellion, sin, and failure of God’s people as a warning for future generations. They kept not his covenant is a constant refrain. The story of God’s people and their failure is parabolic. Who will listen to it and hear? Psalm 78 is a Psalm of judgment that warns the present generation of the wayward example of Israel in the past. Those who sing this Psalm are expected to have the wisdom to be able to decipher and apply the “parables.”
Balaam speaks in parables in Num. 23-24 that turn out to be a curse to Midian, Amelek, and the Kenites. Parables speak of judgment against God’s enemies.
Job’s final speech (Job 26-31) against his three friends is cast in the form of a parable (mashal). It ministers judgment against his three accusers.
Jotham, the youngest of Gideon’s sons, and the only survivor of Abimelech’s murderous coup, declaims a parable from Mt. Gerizim, against his bastard brother—the parable of the trees (Judg. 9). Jotham does not speak plainly, but craftily as a judgment against Abimelech.
Nathan the prophet is sent by the Lord to rebuke David after his adulterous affair with Bathsheba. The first word out of his mouth is the parable of the ewe lamb (2 Sam. 12:1ff). Without any explanation. David understands it to refer to someone else. The parable has masked the truth. Nathan must speak plainly: you are the man!
The prophet Isaiah sings a parable to the people of Israel, one his most famous, the parable of the Vineyard (Isa. 5). It is spoken in righteous indignation as a judgment against Israel. Later the Lord says to Isaiah, “take up this parable against the king of Babylon, and say: “How the oppressor has ceased, How his fury has ended” (Isa. 14:14).
The Word of the Lord came to Ezekiel in Ezek. 17, “Son of man, pose a riddle, and speak a parable to the house of Israel” It is propounded to “the rebellious house of Israel.” Again, in Ezekiel 24, the Lord says, “utter a parable to the rebellious house, and say to them, `Thus says the Lord Yahweh: “Put on a pot, set [it] on, And also pour water into it.”‘”
The prophet Micah speaks: “Therefore thus says Yahweh: “Behold, against this family I am devising disaster, from which you cannot remove your necks; Nor shall you walk haughtily, For this [is] an evil time. In that day [one] shall take up a parable (mashal; “taunt song”) against you, and lament with a bitter lamentation, saying: `We are utterly destroyed!” (Micah 2:3-4).
Now, finally, when Jesus appears “teaching them many things in parables” and “he said nothing to them without a parable” what are we to conclude? The parable is the medium of judgment, the grammar of God’s wrath and curse against his obstinate people.
The parable is propounded to a people that deserve his judicial blinding (Matt. 13:12-13). Parables are uniquely suited to engage and challenge the hearers to judge their own situation. The parables by their very nature as wisdom devices, call for careful thought and spiritual discernment.
Parables mask, they veil the truth. They hide as much as they illustrate. And unless you are predisposed to search out and understand the meaning, like the disciples, and unless you are graciously enlightened by God, as the disciples were, you will not only not understand them but they will serve as a judgment against you. Tragically, figuring out a parable is precisely what dull-hearted, conscience-seared people are not inclined to do.
Now, the question becomes acute: who are these thick hearted, spiritually dense people who deserve nothing but the judgment of veiled truth? They are the people of Israel, God’s own covenant people, especially as exemplified in their leaders: the Pharisees, Sadducees, teachers and scribes of the law, Priests, and the Herodians.
For them the parables serve as a judgment. God punishes their disobedience and stubborn ears by veiling the truth. That’s why Jesus speaks in parables. Parables are the genre of obfuscation. “He who is often rebuked, and hardens his neck, will suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.” (Prov. 29:1).
Lost was pretty sweet tonight.
Thank you – that OT survey is very helpful indeed. In a sense, it concludes little more than what Mark 4:10-12 says explicitly about the purpose of parables. It does, however, corroborate that we have understood Mark 4:10-12 correctly, and gives 4:10-12 a more compelling, somber, even terrifying force.
When people assume that parables are meant to be illustrative, throwing light on truth, they then conclude that we should do the same (= illustrate our teaching). As you say, that is not what parables are, but illumination still has value.
The question I’m left with is, given parables have the purpose you describe, should we still do emulate them? Are there instances when parabolic teaching is the most appropriate form of teaching today? Would that be apposite for instructing a congregation? Sometimes? Never? Depending on the topic?
I await parts 3, 4, … with interest!
Isn’t it interesting that it seems that David 1st needed to not understand Nathan’s parable, pronounce his judgment, and then have it made clear to him that he was indeed the man, for it all to be effective?
I will try this again. I did try to send one out the other day but it didn’t go for some reason…anyway… your conclusion here is interesting to be sure. I was teaching from the parables last year and I couldn’t help but come to the same conclusions that you have but I didn’t like those conclusions since that was not what I had been taught. But then that hasn’t stopped me from teaching what the Scritpture says it simply causes me pause in the midst of seeking God’s will in what I preach. But
However, back to what you have said; I do remember a wisely or was that willy old saint who once said (Dr. Vasholz) “always” and “never “are terms that when we apply them to Scripture mean maybe 90% of the time and so I was wondering if this might apply here? When I think of the parable of the persistent widow, that one seems to be more illustrative than judgemental in nature. I think it still in the end follows your conclusion but I am not sure that is its primary purpose. What do you think? Also, I have been teaching through Judges of late and have come upon the curios history of riddles and how this practice was an accepted practice…almost a sport…in the Middle east for at least a couple of millenium and as I read your “proof texts” I was brought back to how similar these two art forms are and I began to wonder…
Thanks for seeking to aid in my sanctification.
pastordad
Just to add a bit: Samson is the riddle-master, the greater sphinx. I have a bit about this in my *Judges.* Samson’s concealing himself, his messianic secret, in Judges 14 is fulfilled in Jesus’ Messianic Secret.
One other thought: In that parables are designed to confuse the wicked while illuminating the humble, such is true of all of the Bible. In a large sense, the Bible is parable. And in another large sense, creation is parable. The faithless look at creation and see all kinds of evidence and proof of “evolution.”
The parabolic nature of revelation has something to say about apologetics, and what it says is pretty Vantillian. When a Christian scholar tries to be “neutral” in his investigation of creation, he will misread it as surely as do his atheist colleagues.
Yes, Sam, and we see the same sort of thing in Matt. 21 with the parable of the wicked tenants: Jesus’ opponents clearly give the correct ending of the parable and are then enraged when he points out that it applies to them.
Thanks for the good post, Jeff. It should be noted that what you’ve outlined does not exhaust the concept of the mashal in Scripture, but rather focuses on what a mashal means in the mouth of a prophet–those who were commissioned as the covenant prosecutors for YHWH. The book of Proverbs shows another function of the mshalim which is instructive, not judgment. So, if pastors and teachers were to model their communication on Solomon (and the others in the inspired book of Proverbs) in using elegant, metaphorical, even poetic language to get their point across, that would not be bad.
The other element, and maybe you’ll get to this in your other posts, is that the “parable” was also a recognized prophetic genre: parables were about God and Israel. This is clear in Psa. 78, Ezek. 17, and Isa. 5 especially. This means that when Jesus taught in parables, he was not chiefly simply using details from the daily life of his audience, nor was he telling “earthly stories with heavenly meaning” as is often said, but he was telling stories about God and Israel, and his audience would recognize that that’s what he was doing. They didn’t always understand the ending (or didn’t like it, as in Matt. 21), but they did realize, in general, what kinds of stories he was telling.
Joshua: You’ve made some great points. I agree with you. I also think you are dead-on right about parables being stories about about God and Israel. I’ve said before that they are more like redemptive historical allegories than illustrative sermonic stories.
Thanks Jeff this is helpful.
BTW – I’ve heard N.T. Wright say that Jesus was doing such odd things, such wonderfully odd things, that it required stories to explain the meaning. I’m not explaining this well, because it’s been a while, but have you heard this from him? He argues then, that the Church should be about the work of doing wonderful things that nevertheless stand the world’s understandings on their head such that it will require stories/parables for us to explain to a watching and inquisitive world our own behavior. Any thoughts on that?