Of Parables: Parables Tend to be Observational not Exegetical 7.11.2024

    A key word here is “tends”. While I appreciate those who try and provide formal categories for analyzing parables (Snodgrass, Klyne. Stories with Intent: A Comprehensive Guide to the Parables of Jesus. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 2008.; comes to mind, and even Jeremias was a useful older work), that process of formalism in some ways actually contributes to misunderstanding. Dogs tend to be friendly. Not all are. New Cars tend to be more dependable than used, but anyone who has purchased a lemon knows this is not an axiomatic truth. Herein lies a central issue in parables research and preaching. They are not axioms. We will try to nail down some “tendencies” of parables for the rest of this month. Do all follow and share in those tendencies? No. If so, we would use more definite heuristic categories. By considering tendency we avoid the fate of being pecked to death by ducks, by dealing with the vast numbers of formal, contextual, and material differences presented in parables.  

    These essays do not presume to be the last word on parables. Having “last words” on parables, from experienced observation, is a part of the problem. There are places where Jesus gives very direct, specific, (often Biblical) directives. Even when a parable is embedded in a larger discourse (The Good Samaritan for example), the application provided by Jesus is outside of the “storyline” of the parable. Turning an abstract story into something concrete may give a clearer path to a sermon, at the risk of misunderstanding what Jesus meant in the first place (sagacious duplicity). Like providing the punchline to a joke, over-interpreting a parable negates the reason a parable was used in the first place, making the interpreter (you and me) seem cleverer than the parable teller (Jesus). This should give us pause. 

    Let us consider the first tendency of parables. Parables tend to be observational, not exegetical. Jesus could and often did teach the Scriptures. Though there are identifiable similarities with contemporary Rabbinical exegesis, Jesus did not typically follow those conventions. This departure from the expected norm was noted by His audience who exclaimed that he “taught as one with authority” rather than following the traditional Rabbinical process of piling on authoritative precedents. In considering the parables as a whole, then, we want to set aside Jesus’ approach to Scripture and think through the story-telling process in itself. 

    Jesus was clearly the composer or originator of His stories. See Hedrick, Charles W. Parables as Poetic Fictions: The Creative Voice of Jesus. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994., For an example of how to evaluate Jesus’ stories as extra-historical. Herein we must be careful about how we think. Creative and fictional do not signify that they are not true, or that Jesus never told them but that He created them. This is often lost on both scholars and preachers who try and concretize Parables beyond Jesus’ own intent. There are circumstances where Jesus does seem to make such a connection. For example, I find it plausible that the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is citing the historical Lazarus of John 11 as the one who will be ignored “even if he rises from the dead.” Jesus makes the implied connection. 

    The wholesale allegorizing of the Medieval period did not stop with the Protestant Reformation—at least as applied to the parables. Parables are prickly things that can be hard to turn into clear, balanced, propositional sermon points. The parables are based on observation. Most often Jesus goes no further than “the Kingdom of God is like…” And leaves it up to us to discern the application or punchline. (as good storytellers and joke-tellers do). Occasionally a parable like The Sower provides an interpretive matrix, yet even then, the context demonstrates that Jesus is teaching disciples how to understand parables, presumably intending not to provide such insight into future parables. 

    Generations of Christians have asked the question “Why was Jesus so opaque? Why did he leave so much up to us? I can’t really say except that mysteries will be mysterious, and illustrations will escape us--unless we have ears to hear. Maybe the telling of the tales is not the problem. Maybe it is our nearly inescapable, instinctive materialism. Perhaps we need to faithfully climb our way past the idols of concrete perception that prevent faithful understanding. Maybe the propositional pronouncements of the Law were too complicated for us—or too easy to explain away. Maybe Jesus wants us to follow close enough to hear His voice even after two millennia. We need to learn the Kingdom lessons of leavening bread, sowing seed, finding lost things, and sorting fish. Maybe He spoke this way to keep the Kingdom ever beyond our grasp so that we might walk in faith.