PerspectiveTransformation by Means of Parables

Robert C.Newman

Dedication

In Dr. MacRae's long seminary career, oneof his distinctive emphases has been the importance of communication.  Not only must the pastor or teacherknow God's Word, he must also be able to communicate it clearly to others.  One important means Dr. MacRae has usedto this end is storytelling. Inview of this emphasis, this paper is dedicated to him.

Introduction

The influence of mental images on humanthought and action is vast. Ifanything, the aphorism "a picture is worth a thousand words" is anunderstatement. This is especiallytrue today when

motion pictures and television threatento make the printed word obsolete. Yet long before the age of modern media, the value of word‑picturesfor holding and persuading an audience was

recognized by orator and teacher alike.

In any given culture, some mental imagesor paradigms are so pervasive as to be accepted without argument.  For such basic images, experience is interpretedin conformity with them so that they are rarely challenged.¹ Even inthe proverbially objective realm of science, basic paradigms tend to controlthe interpretation of data. Thecollapse of one paradigm and its

replacement by another constitutes ascientific revolution.² Consequently, the problem of our coming to truth may be much aggravatedby the influence of false paradigms, which have to be

broken for us to escape from them.

Sometimes a paradigm is broken merely bypresenting an alternative. The newparadigm is so clearly superior that nearly everyone recognizes itimmediately. Other paradigms must

gradually win their way.  Even in the best cases, however, those whohave much to lose by a change in paradigm may be unwilling to accept it.  Recall the ending of Hans ChristianAndersen's tale, "The Emperor's New Clothes." As the ruler paradeddown the street

in his non‑existent robes, thecrowd pretended to see and appreciate them:

No one wished it to be noticed that hecould see nothing, for then he would have been unfit for his office, or elsevery stupid. None of the emperor'sclothes had met with such approval as these had.

"Buthe has nothing on!" said alittle child at last.

"Just listen to the innocentchild," said the father, and each one whispered to his neighbor what thechild had said.

 "But he has nothing on!"  the whole of the people called out atlast.

This struck the Emperor, for it seemed tohim as if they were right; but he thought to himself, "I must go on withthe procession now." And thechamberlains walked along still more uprightly, holding up the train which wasnot there at all.

Several recent studies of the parables ofJesus have drawn attention to their function of breaking down paradigms or transformingperspectives.⁴ William Beardslee, for instance, compares the Gospelparables to Zen koans,a type of clever verbal harrasment used by Buddhist teachers to disorient theirdisciples. One well‑known koan is "What is the sound of one hand clapping?"⁵Eta Linnemann sees transformation of perspective as the most significant roleof parable. In a tenseconfrontation between speaker and audience, the "narrator, who has at his disposalnothing other than the power of language, is able to prevail upon his listeners,because through the parable he offers them a new understanding of thesituation."⁶ Somewhat similar views have been expressed byseveral others.⁷

Did Jesus use parables in this way?  If so, how did they function totransform the perspectives of his hearers? In this paper we shall see that Jesus did use parables inthis way, and we shall examine the function of the Synoptic parables for thispurpose. Rather than survey theextensive secondary literature recently written on this subject, our appraochwill be to examine the parables themselves. For each relevant feature investigated, we shall giveseveral exaples from these parables and list others. In an appendix these features will be charted for sixty-fourSynoptic parables. Biblicalquotations will conform to the New International Version.

To date, most writers involved in thisaspect of parable research have assumed a critical attitude toward the Gospels.For them, the context of each parable, its audience, and especially anyinterpretation given in the text, are automatically suspect. As a result theyoften claim that we cannot know the original circumstances of a parable, andsometimes they replace information supplied by the Gospels with speculative reconstructionsof their own. Such a proceduredenies the Bible's own claims to inspiration and rejects the historical evidencethat the Gospels were written by apostles and their associates.  In consequence much valuableinformation is discarded. We shall take the parables as they stand.

Presenting an Alternative Perspective

Surveying the Synoptic parables, it soonbecomes clear that Jesus did not content himself with the mere destruction of perspective(as in a koan) butthat he regularly presented an alternative perspective to his audience. This alternative paradigm or perspectivecan take various forms. We may convenientlyclassify these forms by distinguishing between parables which are analogues andparables which are examples. Undereach of these categories, we shall further subdivide the parables into thosewhich look at things from the same direction as the audience does and thosewhich, so to speak, move the audience to a new location.  Let us look at each of these cases inturn.

Analogue

In presenting an alternative perspective,the parable is naturally most suited to function as an analogue.  A parable is usually either an extendedsimile or an extended metaphor, both of which are analogies.  Some relationship or incident from everydaylife is presented as an analogue to some relationship in the spiritual realm orsome event in salvation history –"an earthly story with a heavenlymeaning." Jesus' presentationof this analogy affords his audience a new way of seeing these spiritualmatters and therefore an opportunity to break away from some false paradigmwhich till then has held them in bondage.

Same Location. A number of Jesus' analogies preservethe standpoint of the audience but propose a different way of seeing thesituation. The listener is to staywhere he is but see his situation in a new light. If the audience is directly involved in the particular truthor event Jesus is treating, then they are involved in the same way in theanalogy he presents. If the audienceis not directly involved, then they are not directly involved in the analogyeither.

As an example of direct involvement,consider the parable of the Defendant (5):⁸ "Settle mattersquickly with your adversary who is taking you to court.  Do it while you are still with him

on the way, or he may hand you over tothe judge . . ." Here Jesus,using second person pronouns, invites his audience to recognize their statusbefore God as analogous to that of a

person about to be hauled into court asdefendant in a hopeless case. Better settle out of court!

In the parable of the Mote and Beam (7),the second person also occurs: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust inyour brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"  A judgmental person trying to deliveranother from sin is as ludicrous as a fellow with impaired vision trying to doeye surgery! In both these casesthe listeners are directly involved as sinners, so they are the "you"in each parable. God and the otherbrother remain in the third person as "adversary" and "brother,"as there is no attempt to put the listener in the other person's place.  Similar second person analogues occurin (28, 36) and (47).

Analogues in which the audience isdirectly involved may also be presented in the third person without change ofdirection as long as the narrative is constructed so the audience identifies

with the proper person.  In the parable of the Waiting Servants (49),the narrative starts with the second person and then shifts to the third:"Be dressed ready for service and keep your lamps

burning, like men waiting for theirmaster to return from a wedding banquet . . ." Such analogues occur alsoin (37) and (54).

Unfortunately it is not always easy totell with whom the audience is supposed to identify if there is no explicit indicator.  In the parable of the Hidden Treasure(21), the audience will probably identify with the only actor, though there isnothing to tell us to do so; (22, 24) and (42) are similar.  Probably it is safest to categorizethese under our next category, "New Location."

In other cases, the audience is aspectator with regard to the spiritual matters in view, so all actors in theparable occur in the third person. For instance, in the Sons of the Bridechamber (11), John's discipleshave asked Jesus why his disciples don't fast, so the bridegroom (analogous toJesus) and the sons of the bridechamber (Jesus' disciples) appear in the thirdperson. The

situation is similar in the Strong ManSpoiled (15).

New Location. Most of Jesus' analogies, however, move his audience to a newstandpoint. If the listener isinvolved in the situation, he is invited to step outside to see it in a new light.  If he is not involved, he is invited tostep inside the situation. Tolkiencalls this device "mooreeffoc":

And there is (especially for the humble)Mooreeffoc, or Chestertonian Fantasy. Mooreeffoc is a fantastic word, but itcould be seen written up in every town in the land. It is Coffee‑room, viewed from the inside through aglass door, as it was seen by Dickens on a dark London day; and it was used byChesterton to denote the queerness of things that have become trite, when theyare seen suddenly from a new angle.⁹

One example of this is John the Baptist'sparable of the Axe at the Roots (1). Instead of trusting in their descent fromAbraham, the audience is called upon to step back and see themselves as

fruitless trees would be viewed by afarmer or axeman – good only to be cut down! In the parable of the Sower (17), the disciples are given anexternal view of the spread of the Gospel: they may expect varied results likethose a farmer gets from grain falling on different types of soil.  Other examples of this type are (2, 3,4, 6, 9, 10, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 38,39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 50, 53, 55, 57, 58, 59, 62) and (64).

Taking God's Place. A special case of this change of location is that in whichthe audience is invited to imagine themselves in God's place.  This type is clearly seen in theparable of the Son

Asking Bread (8): "Which of you, ifhis son asks for bread will give him a stone? . . . If you then, who are evil, know how to give good giftsto your children, how much more will your Father

in heaven give good gifts to those whoask him!" This also occurs in(56) and (61), and – assumingwomen were present in the audience – in the Lost Coin (57).

In a number of other cases, the audiencemay be invited to look at the situation as though they were God by the deviceof identifying with the character representing him in the parable.

For instance, one may tend to identifywith the axeman in the Axe at the Roots (1), or with the landowner in the Tares(18). Other examples of this sort are (3, 12, 13, 18, 26, 30, 31, 34) and

(50). More ambiguous are (14) and (25).

A case of special interest is theProdigal Son (58). Will the audience (including many Pharisees) identify withthe Father, or will they insist on identifying with the elder brother?

Example

Much rarer among the parables are thosewhich teach by giving samples of the behavior to be imitated or avoided ratherthan by analogue. This class isrestricted to the Gospel of Luke and is

usually viewed as consisting of the GoodSamaritan (46), the Rich Fool (48), the Rich Man and Lazarus (60), and thePharisee and the Publican (63).¹⁰ I would add two others: the LowestSeats

(51) and Advice on Invitations (52). Somemight be inclined to deny that these are parables, since they do not fallwithin the range of the English word "parable." However, the Hebrewconcept

behind the NT usage is broader, and threeof these are explicitly called "parable": (48) in Luke 12:16, (51) in14:7, and (63) in 18:9. Jülicher calls them "illustrative instances."¹¹Boucher

suggests that they are cases of extendedsynecdoche rather than simile or metaphor.¹²

Same Location. As in the case of analogue, we candistinguish between cases involving no change of direction and those which shift.  An example of the former is (51), wherethe guests at a banquet are advised not to pick the most prestigious places at thetable lest they be embarrased when the host arrives. This, we are told, is a sample of the more general lesson"everyone who

exalts himself will be humbled . .." It applies directly to thebanquet guests without change of direction. It also comes home powerfully to us by demonstrating thatour selfishness and greed

really contradict our claim to believe ina God who abases the proud and exalts the humble. Parable (52) also falls in this category.

New Location. The other four example‑parables– (46, 48, 60) and (63) – give a shift in location. They invite usto step back and look at our own lives from outside. Do we pass by those in

trouble without getting involved?  Are we concerned about our own securityand pleasure more than about those who are poor? Do we look down on others from our spiritualsuperiority? These are powerfulpictures to shatter our complacent self‑images, yet each provides analternative lifestyle for us to imitate.

Criticism of Audience Perspective

Usually Jesus' parables are more thanjust illustrations; they provide an alternative perspective to that held bysome or most of his audience. Infact, most of Jesus' parables are at least an implicit criticism of theaudience's perspective. Manyothers are explicit in their criticism, and some reduce the audience perspectiveto absurdity.

Explicit Audience Criticism

We may define explicit audience criticismin a parable as the case in which the audience's perspective actually shows upin the parable to be set in contrast to Jesus' perspective.  An example of explicit criticism is theProdigal Son (58), where the elder brother is present to espouse the Pharisaicposition while the father gives Jesus' view. As G. V. Jones observes:

. . . no Pharisee with any perception couldmiss the point. The elder son isnot identified with any particular group . . . he is merely a character in the story;yet he was not included for a literary purpose, but in order that the listenersmight be brought to pass judgment upon themselves through perceiving the correspondencebetween the situation in the story and that of real life.¹³

By contrast, the criticism in the LostSheep (56) and Lost Coin (57) is implicit, as only God's perspective is given.

Not only Jesus' opponents, but also the crowdand Jesus' disciples receive explicit criticism as well.  In the Tower Builder (54), themultitudes following Jesus are warned that they are in for a tougher time thanthey expect. The foolish builder whodoesn't count the cost and therefore cannot finish the tower represents theaudience's perspective, while Jesus recommends prudence and foresight in viewof the troubles (persecution?) ahead. In the Unmerciful Servant (29), Jesus' rebukes Peter's desire towithhold forgiveness. Peter's viewis represented by the servant forgiven ten thousand talents who refuses toforgive another a mere hundred denarii. God's view of the matter is represented by the king.  Other examples of expicit audience criticismoccur in (7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18?, 25, 27, 30, 39, 48, 51, 52, 55, 61,63) and (64).

Implicit Audience Criticism

Implicit audience criticism occurs inthose cases where the perspective of the audience does not find explicitpictorial representation in the parable. Cases (56) and (57) were mentioned above, in both of which Jesuscriticises his opponents' non‑evangelistic perspective.  Another example is the Strong Man Spoiled(15), where Jesus argues his exorcisms correspond to a soldier (?) plundering astrong man's household. ThePharisaic view – that Jesus' exorcisms are more like a stage‑play– does not appear.

Jesus also uses implicit audiencecriticism with the crowds and his disciples. To the crowds Jesus presents the Barren Fig Tree (50) asGod's justification for bringing destruction on Israel

(with a more general application tosinful mankind). The gardener'srequest to spare the tree for another year is the reason why all have notperished as yet. No sample of the audience'sperspective (say, fruitful fig trees) appears. To his disciples Jesus' parable of the Friend at Midnight(47) pictures the importance of persistence in prayer, but their inclination to

give up does not find expression.

Besides the examples mentioned above,parables (1, 3, 4, 5, 6,16, 17, 21?, 22?, 26, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 38, 45, 46,53, 59, 60) and (62) appear to be cases of implicit criticism of the audience

perspective.

In other cases, parables appear to beeither illustrations of spiritual truths or advance protection against falseperspectives that will arise in some situation still future to Jesus' earthly ministry.  The Fan in Hand (2), for instance,appears to be a vivid illustration of the judgment to come, which the average Israeliteor Pharisee of the time would presumably find in agreement with his owntheology. The controversial aspecthere would be John's teaching regarding who is in danger of this judgment.  The same can be said for the Dragnet(23) and possibly the Sheep and the Goats (41). Other parables which areprobably basically illustrative are (19, 20) and (24).

On the other hand, the exhortations towatchfulness and faithfulness found in the Householder and Thief (37), theWaiting Porter (44) and the Waiting Servants (49) appear to be advance

warnings for each generation of believersto live in the light of the Lord's sudden return. Each parable attacks in advance those false perspectiveswhich deny a miraculous return or final

judgment. Naturally, those who prefer such perspectives will tend tosee these parables as unauthentic creations of the early church!  Similarly the Vultures and Carcass (35)seems designed to protect believers against false "second comings,"reminding us that the real thing will be easily recognized, even to be seen fromquite a distance. The Fig TreeHeralds Summer (36)

similarly points to definite signspreceding the Lord's return.

Absurdity

Among the explicit and implicit examplesof audience criticism, some are striking in their use of absurdity as a weaponagainst the false perspective. Linnemann mentions this use of the

parable in rabbinic circles as well,though she characterizes such arguments as "superficial."¹⁴

Jesus makes considerable use of thisdevice, and not only against his opponents. The absurdity of Tasteless Salt (3), of hiding a lit lamp(4), of trying to do eye surgery with imparied vision (7), and of feeding one'sson a stone (8), are each directed at Jesus' own disciples, or at least at would‑bedisciples. The foolishness ofpatching with unshrunk cloth (12), putting fermenting wine in dried‑outwineskins (13), building without a proper foundation (9), and fasting at awedding party (11) are directed either at the crowds or at reasonably neutral inquirerslike John's disciples.

Yet Jesus reserves his strongestdenunciations for his opponents. They are blind men trying to lead others (27); stubborn children whom nogame can please (14); faultfinders who even blame a physician for visiting thesick (10); tenant farmers who think they can get the landlord's property bykilling his heir while the landlord still lives (32); builders who don't recognizethe chief stone in the architect's plans (33); and rebellious subjects whospurn a royal feast by killing those who bring the invitation (34).

Admittedly there is a danger in using absurdity.  When one seeks to make intelligentopponents look foolish, it is easy to fall into caricature andmisrepresentation. Yet ifChristianity is true, then opposition to Jesus is basically foolish no matter howsophisticated or rationalized it may be. The absurdity in Jesus' parables is thus both fitting and profound.  In the universe that really exists,where the God of the Bible is the omnipotent and righteous judge, all sin isirrational and

deserves to be presented as absurd sothat we may see it in its true colors.

Other Features Relevant to TransformingPerspective

In order that our outlook be transformed,it is not enough that our false perspectives be criticized and we be given thetrue picture. We must alsounderstand what we hear, and to hear we must listen. As Scripture tells us, the work of the Holy Spirit iscrucial in all this. In thispaper, however, we are confining ourselves to the means Jesus uses in hisparables to aid attention and understanding, rather than dealing with the unseenactivity of the Spirit.

Jesus is first of all a giftedstoryteller.¹⁵ He constructs interesting plots with memorable andrealistic characters in a few bold strokes. Unnecessary detail is eliminated; there are few actors andusually only one scene. Characterizationand emotion are directly relevant to the plot. Vividness is provided by concrete details, direct discourse,and thoughts spoken aloud. Thelistener's interest is aroused by questions invoking his judgment, by advice,suspense, surprise and mystery. His memory is activated by the parable's vividness, parallelism and repetition.  Because he was interesting, even Jesus'enemies listened with attention.

In this paper, we have space to examineonly three features Jesus used: involvement, surprise and mystery.

Involvement

Naturally, the intrinsic interest of astory tends to involve the listeners. Jesus makes use of everyday images of home life, society and agriculturewith which his audiences were familiar.

Yet he does so in such a way that thestories are not boring, trite or commonplace. He also makes considerable use of second personconstructions to pull the listener into the story,¹⁶

sometimes giving advice, sometimes askingquestions, and occasionally inviting imaginative empathy.

Advice. In the parable of the Defendant (5),Jesus advises his audience to make friends with their accuser before their (hopeless)case comes to trial. In the FigTree Heralds Summer (36), he tells his disciples to learn how to recognize an approachingevent by the signs which precede it. In the rather cryptic parable of Fire, Salt and Peace (43), hisdisciples are urged to have salt in themselves. At the end of the Good Samaritan (46), Jesus advises thelawyer to "go and do

likewise." We are urged to imitate the Dishonest Steward (59) in makingfriends for ourselves by means of the unrighteous mammon.  In general, the advice is part of theparable when the

perspective involves no change ofdirection, and part of the application when the standpoint is changed.  Other parables employing advice are (6,7, 37, 44, 49, 51, 52) and (61), not counting a number (e.g., 10, 17) withadvice in the near context.

Questions. To draw the audience into the parable,Jesus will also ask them questions, sometimes rhetorical, sometimes actually seekinga verbal response.

The parable of the Son Asking Bread (8)rhetorically asks the men of the audience how they would respond to their son'srequest. In the Sons of theBridechamber (11), John's disciples

are asked to judge whether fasting isappropriate for wedding attendants at the festivities.  In (54) Jesus asks the crowd if theywould start building a tower without estimating its cost and

checking their own resources.  In (61), he asks the disciples how theywould treat their slave at dinnertime, as guest or servant?  Other examples of rhetorical questionsoccur in (14, 15, 19, 20,

27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 38, 43, 47, 55, 56,57) and (62).

Other questions asked by Jesus actuallyreceived verbal responses. Whichof the two sons (31), asks Jesus, did the will of the father?  In the parable of the wicked Tenants(32), Matthew reports that some in the audience answered Jesus' questionconcerning what the owner will do when he learns the tenants have killed hisson. Likewise, Simon the Pharisee answersJesus' question in the Two Debtors (45), as does the lawyer in the GoodSamaritan (46).

Other second person constructions. Jesus also uses the second person to refer to his audience in casesother than the question or command, apparently to encourage involvement.  In the parable

of the Tasteless Salt (3), Jesus speaksdirectly to his disciples: "you are the salt of the earth."  In the parables of Weather Forcasting(28), Jesus involves his audience: "When you see . . ." and "Whenit is evening, you say . . ." The parable of the Fig Tree (36) issimilar. Neglecting cases whereJesus merely says, "I say to you," the other examples are (6, 29, 51)and (52).

Surprise

Another device Jesus uses in his parablesto attract and hold attention is surprise: a sudden twist in the plot, animprobable feature, an exaggeration. This is an extremely common feature,

occurring in about half theparables. The absurditiescatalogued previously under audience criticism belong to this category.

Yet not all the surprises involve thefoolishness of characters representing sinners. Some of the surprises picture the amazing grace of God: afather runs to welcome his prodigal son (58),

receiving him with splendor and feasting;¹⁷a king forgives an enormous debt (29); a householder invites beggars to fill uphis banquet hall (53). Others picture the severity of God's judgment:

the king cancels his forgiveness when theforgiven servant shows himself unforgiving (29); the improperly‑dressedwedding guest is bound hand and foot to be thrown out (34); the foolish virginsare excluded from the feast merely for being late (39). These surprises offoolishness, grace and severity seem rather improbable or exaggerated in theparable's story. Yet when we

move from story to meaning, we find theyare realistic.

Still other surprises are intended toshake the audience into reexamining themselves and their view of things.  This is probably the purpose of havingthe Samaritan be the hero in (46)

and the publican in (63). The surprise ofthe Axe at the Roots (1) and the Defendant (5) is to see oneself as lost,rather than the other fellow. Oneof the surprises of the Dishonest Steward

(59) is Jesus' advice to imitate thecrook! (presumably in takingappropriate action now in view of our brief tenure as stewards).

The surprise in the parable attracts ourattention. It should not besurprising, then, that it is in the surprise itself that the main point of theparable often lies. As Jones saysof the landowner's payment scheme in the Vineyard Workers (30): "It is naturalto resent the apparently flagrant unfairness of the economic policy described;yet it is precisely here that the meaning of the parable is focused."¹⁸

It is noteworthy that Jesus himselfoccasionally draws attention to a surprising feature by having one of theparable's characters react to it. This is seen clearly when the all‑day vineyard workers object toequal pay for the latecomers (30). It also appears in the elder son's objectionto celebrating the prodigal's return (58) and in the bystanders' response tothe servant with ten pounds being given another (64). Possibly this is one ofthe functions of the servants who desire to pull up the tares in (18) and ofthose who report their unforgiving fellow‑servant in (29).

This very surprise also fixes the parablein our minds to be remembered long after we would have forgotten a blanderstory. What sticks in our memoryfrom the Wicked Tenants (32) is (a) the landowner sending his son after the wayhis slaves were treated; and (b) the tenants thinking that killing him will getthem the property: i.e., the foolishness of sin and the great grace of

God. "It is the improbable trait inthe parable that drives the meaning home."¹⁹

Mystery

Since the time of Jülicher it has beenfashionable in critical circles to deny the presence of mystery in theauthentic parables of Jesus, despite the explicit teaching of Mark 4:11‑12and its

parallels.²⁰ Instead, Jülicherproposed that Jesus' parables were non‑allegorical, made only one point,and were intended to be easily understood. From this it would follow that many of the

Gospel parables have been reworked (ifnot invented altogether) since the time of Jesus; that allegoricalinterpretations like that supplied with the Sower (17) are not genuine; andthat

complex parables which make more than onepoint (such as the King's Wedding Feast (34) and the Prodigal Son (58)) are atbest the fusion of two authentic parables.

None of this is necessary.  It is clear from the LXX that in Jewishusage parabole is theequivalent of mashal,and that mashalincludes the riddle or dark saying (Prov 1:6). The OT

parables of the Ewe Lamb (2 Sam 12:1‑4),the Widow's Sons (2 Sam 14:5‑7) and the Escaped Prisoner (1 Kings 20:39‑40)depend upon a certain degree of mystification to succeed.  Besides all this, both ancient Jewishand early Christian interpreters (including the Gospel writers) agreed thatparables could be mysterious.²¹

Admittedly, Jesus' purpose formystification in Mark 4 and parallels is a hard saying, though no more so thanIsa 6:9‑10 from which it is drawn. This writer suspects that the reason God

hid the meaning of certain parables fromthe crowd involved a combination of at least two factors: (a) their judicial hardeningas a punishment for resisting Jesus' earlier ministry; (b) the

setting up of a situation in which Jesuswould be rejected and crucified to provide our redemption.  In any case, the presence of mystery insome of Jesus' parables is the clear teaching of Scripture, and (as MortonSmith²² has pointed out) it is also a natural conclusion to be drawnfrom the wide divergence among modern interpreters over the meaning of some ofthe Gospel

parables!

Yet mystery is not confined to theparables given from the Sower (17) onward, nor are all the later parablesmysterious. There must be at least one other function of mystery in Jesus'

parables besides that given in Mark 4.

Given the tradition of the three OTparables mentioned above, we should not be surprised to find mystery used as adevice to gain the hearer's judgment for a matter before he realizes he is

judging himself.  In each of these cases, neither Davidnor Ahab realized how the story related to himself until the storyteller providedthe interpretation. Jones seessomething of this sort

happening in the Unmerciful Servant (29),the Good Samaritan (46), and the Rich Man and Lazarus (60), where theapplication is sprung on the listener in the final verse after previously

obtaining his "approving interest."²³To these we can add the Two Sons (31) and the Two Debtors (45), and probablythe Wicked Tenants (32) and the Rejected Stone (33), though by this point theJewish Leaders had begun to realize that Jesus was referring to them (Matt21:45).

If our suggestion on Mark 4 (above) hasany merit, another reason for mystery might be the concealment of future eventsfrom those whose actions could otherwise interfere with their

fulfillment. Paul twice speaks of the ignorance of the leaders inopposing Christ, saying of himself, "I was shown mercy because I acted inignorance and unbelief" (1 Tim 1:13), and of others "if they had[understood], they would not have crucified the Lord of glory" (1 Cor2:8). The latter of these two statements occurs in a discussion of God'ssecrets which are known only by revelation. Such a reason for mystery has OT precedent, for example, inthe book of Daniel, which contains a number of cryptic allegorical visions,plus the command to seal up the book

until the end (Dan 12:4). This wouldexplain the mysterious reference to the bridegroom being taken away in (11), tothe slain son in (32), and to the rejected stone in (33), all referring toJesus' death.

In a somewhat similar vein, the wholematter of Jesus' two comings with an interval between could not be broachedbefore the crucifixion, yet the recognition that Jesus taught this

mysteriously in his parables would be agreat comfort to his disciples later. This would explain the cryptic nature of the parables of the kingdom (17‑23),dealing with the interval between the two comings. It might also explain what some of the "newthings" are that the householder would bring out of his treasury in (24),i.e., further understanding of these parables by his disciples in the light oflater developments. The departureof the nobleman to a distant land to receive a kingdom and return (64) wouldalso fit in this category. Naturally, those who deny supernatural prediction will not beenthusiastic about such proposals.

Most of the parables also have littlemysteries about them, not the least of which is whether and how far to pressthe details. For instance, what are we to make of the "discard" and "trampling"of the tasteless salt (3)? Is this merely pictorial or also to be interpreted?  What of the "last cent" inthe Defendant (5)? The "both destroyed" of the wine and wineskins (13)?Is the leaven (20) good or evil? What are the "plants" in Plants Uprooted (26)? The"wedding garments" of the King's Wedding Feast (34)? The"oil" of the Ten Virgins (39)? The "bankers" of the Talents(40)? For that matter, what does it mean to be "salted with fire"(43)? Perhaps Raymond Brown is right in suggesting that the parables aredesigned to leave "enough doubt to challenge the hearers into active thoughtand inquiry,"²⁴ an activity that might eventually succeed inoverturning some of their false but cherished paradigms.

Conclusions

Having completed this brief survey of theparables of Jesus, it indeed appears that most of them are designed to alterthe perspective of his listeners. Only a few appear to be purely illustrative. A few others seem to be designed as antidotes to futureproblems or, equivalently, to alter the perspective principally of futurereaders. The existence of thislast category should not be unexpected for those who believe in the God of theBible, who knows the end from the beginning.

Jesus accomplishes this alteration ofperspective by grasping our attention through vividness, involvement, surpriseand mystery; by showing up our own perspectives as false and foolish;

and by presenting the true perspectivesin a memorable way.

Since Jesus first spoke these parables,nearly two thousand years have passed. Our culture today is largely industrial rather than agricultural, andfar more specialized and (we suppose) sophisticated. Yet his parables have not lost their power to expose our ownpretensions as being as insubstantial as the Emperor's new clothes.

References

1. See, e.g,Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality: ATreatise on the Sociology of Knowledge(Garden City, N. Y.: Anchor Books, 1967).

2. Thomas S.Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2^nd ed.  (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1970).

3. Andrew Lang, ed., The Yellow FairyBook (New York: Dover, 1966)25.

4. Some reviewsof recent parable research are J. C. Little, "Parable Research in theTwentieth Century," Exp Tim87 (1976) 356‑60; 88 (1976) 40‑43, 71‑75; W. Wink,"Letting Parables Live," Christian Century 97 (1980) 1062‑64; B. B. Scott, "Parablesof Growth Revisited: Notes on the Current State of Parable Research," BTB 11 (1981) 3‑9; M. Boucher, TheMysterious Parable: A Literary Study(Washington, D.C.: Catholic Bibl. Assoc., 1977), chap. 1.

5. W. A. Beardslee, "Parable,Proverb and Koan," Semeia12 (1978) 151‑77.

6. E. Linnemann, The Parables of Jesus (London: SPCK, 1966)19‑21.

7. A. N.Wilder,The Language of the Gospel(Cambridge: Harvard, 1971); R. W. Funk, Language, Hermeneutic and the Wordof God (New York: Harperand Row, 1966); P. Ricoeur, "The 'Kingdom' in the Parables of Jesus,"ATR 63 (1981) 165‑69;J. D. Crossan, In Parables(New York: Harper and Row, 1973); N. Perrin, Jesus and the Language of theKingdom (Philadelphia:Fortress, 1976).

8. Numbers inparentheses will indicate parable numbers in the Appendix, where also therelevant Scripture references may be found.

9. J. R. R. Tolkien, "On FairyStories," in The Tolkien Reader (New York: Ballantine, 1966) 58.

10. W. J. Moulton, "Parable," Hastings'Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels(1906) 2:314.

11. A. Jülicher, "Parables," EncyclopaediaBiblica (1899) 3:3566.

12. Boucher, Mysterious Parable 22.

13. G. V. Jones, The Art and Truth ofthe Parables (London:SPCK, 1964) 114.

14. Linnemann, Parables 20.

15. See, e.g.,R. E. Brown, "Parables of Jesus," New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967) 10:985‑86; Linnemann, Parables 12‑16; Ricoeur, "Kingdom inParables" 166.

16. Cp.Flesch's concepts of "personal words" and "personal sentences;"e.g., Rudolf Flesch, How to Write, Speak and Think More Effectively (New York: New American Library, 1960)303.

17. Ricoeur, "Kingdom inParables" 167.

18. Jones, Art and Truth of Parables 116.

19. Ibid., 117.

20. A. Jülicher,Die Gleichnisreden Jesu,2 vols. (Tubingen: Mohr, 1888‑99);his views are sketched in English in his article "Parable" in EncyclopediaBiblica.

21. An excellent response to Jülicher isBoucher, Mysterious Parable,esp. chap. 1.

22. Cited in ibid., 41.

23. Jones, Art and Truth of Parables 117‑118.

24. Brown, "Parables of Jesus"10:984.

Appendix:

Classificationof Parables

Key to Notations and Abbreviations:

Parable& Location: Parable number, name & location givenby chapter & verses, first in Matthew, then Mark, then Luke; 0 = not inparticular Gospel.

Parable Type: M = metaphor; S = similitude; P = narrative parable; E = exemplaryparable;

A= allegorical features.

Audience: C = crowd; D = disciples; O = opponents; * = not same occasion indifferent Gospels.

Standpoint: G = God's; N = new (change in standpoint); S = same (no change).

Criticism: I = implicit; X = explicit; R = reductio ad absurdum.

Other Features: A = advice; M = mystery; Q = question; S = surprise.

Parable (Location)	Type	Audience	Perspective	Criticism	Other
1. Axe at Roots (3:10;0;0)	S	CO	NG?	I	S
2. Fan in Hand (3:12;0;0)	S	CO	N
3. Tasteless Salt (5:13;9:50;14:34‑35)	S	CD*	NG?	IR	SM
4. Lamp & Bushel (5:15;4:21;8:16&11:33)	S	CDO*	N	IR	S
5. Defendant (5:25‑26;0;12:57‑58)	S	CD*	S	I	SMA
6. Eye as Light of Body (6:22‑23;0;11:34‑36)	S	CD*	N	I	A
7. Mote & Beam (7:3‑5;0;6:41‑42)	S	CD	S	XR	SMA
8. Son Asking Bread (7:9‑12;0;11:11‑13)	S	CD*	G	XR	SQ
9. Wise & Foolish Blders (7:24‑27;0;6:47‑49)	S	CD	N	XR	S?
10. Physician Heals Sick (9:12;2:17;5:31‑32)	M?S?	DO	N	XR	S?
11. Sons of Bridechamber (9:14‑15;2:18‑20;5:33‑5)	SA?	C	S	XR	SMQ
12. New Patch (9:16;2:21;5:36)	S	C	S?G?	XR	SM
13. New Wine (9:17;2:22;5:37‑39)	S	C	NG?	XR	SM

Parable (Location)	Type	Audience	Perspective	Criticism	Other
14. Childr in Marketplace (11:16‑19;0;0)	S	C	NG?	XR	Q
15. Strong Man Spoiled (12:29;3:27;11:21‑22)	S	CO	S	I	Q
16. Empty House (12:43‑45;0;11:24‑26)	S?	CO	N	I	M
17. Sower (13:3‑8;4:4‑8;5:5‑8)	SA	CD	N	I	M
18. Tares (13:24‑30;0;0)	PA	CD	NG?	X?	SM
19. Mustard Seed (13:31‑2;4:30‑2;3:18‑19)	SA?	CD	N		MQ
20. Leaven (13:33;0;13:20‑21)	SA?	CD	N		MQ
21. Hidden Treasure (13:44;0;0)	P	D?	N?S?	I?	SM
22. Pearl (13:45‑46;0;0)	P	D?	N/S?	I?	SM
23. Dragnet (13:46‑50;0;0)	SA	D	N		M
24. Householder's Trsure (13:52;0;0)	S	D	S	I?	M
25. Defilement (15:11;7:15;0)	SA?	CDO	G?	X	SM
26. Plants Uprooted (15:13;0;0)	M?S?	D	NG?	I	M
27. Blind Leading Blind (15:14;0;6:39)	S	CDO*	N	XR	SQ
28. Weather Forecasting (16:2‑3;0;12:54‑55)	S	CO*	S	I	SQ
29. Unmerciful Servant (18:23‑25;0;0)	P	D	N	X	S
30. Vineyard Workers (20:1‑16;0;0)	P	D	NG?	X	S
31. Two Sons (21:28‑32;0;0)	S?P?	CO	N	I	Q
32. Wicked Tenants (21:33‑41;12:1‑9;20:9‑16	PA	CO	N	IR?	M?
33. Rejected Stone (21:42‑4;12:10‑11;20:17)	S?P?	CO	N	IR	SMQ
34. King's Wedding Feast (22:1‑14;0;0, cp #53)	PA	CO	NG?	IR?	SM?

Parable (Location)	Type	Audience	Perspective	Criticism	Other
35. Vultures & Carcass (24:28;0;17:37)	M?S?	D*	N		M
36. Fig Tr Heralds Smmr (24:32‑3;13:28‑9;21:29‑31)	S	D	S		A
37. Householder & Thief (24:42‑44;0;12:39)	S	C?D*	S		SMA
38. Unfthful Uppr‑Srvant (24:45‑51;0;12:40‑42)	P	C?D*	N	I?	SQ
39. Ten Virgins (25:1‑13;0;0)	PA?	D	N	X	SMA
40. Talents (25:14‑30;0;0,cp #64)	PA	D	N	X	SM
41. Sheep & Goats (25:32‑33;0;0)	M?S?	D	N
42. Blade, Ear & Grain (0;4:26‑29;0)	SA?	CD	N?S?		M
43. Fire, Salt & Peace (0;9:49;0)	M?	D	N?		MQA
44. Waiting Porter (0;13:34‑36;0,cp #49)	S	D	N		A
45. Two Debtors (0;0;7:41‑43)	PA?	O?	N	I	SQ
46. Good Samaritan (0;0;10:30‑37)	E	CO	N	I	SQA
47. Friend at Midnight (0;0;11:5‑8)	P	D	S	I	SQ
48. Rich Fool (0;0;12:16‑21)	E	C	N	X	S
49. Waiting Servants (0;0,cp #44;12:35‑38)	S	D	S		SA
50. Barren Fig Tree (0;0;13:6‑9)	P	C	NG?	I
51. Lowest Seats (0;0;14:7‑11)	E	C?O?	S	X	SA
52. Advice on Invitations (0;0;14:12‑14)	E	C?O?	S	X	SA
53. Great Supper (0,cp #34;0;14:15‑24)	P	C?O?	N	I	S
54. Tower Builder (0;0;14:28‑30)	S	C	S	X	Q
55. King at War (0;0;14:31‑33)	S	C	N	X	Q

Parable (Location)	Type	Audience	Perspective	Criticism	Other
56. Lost Sheep (18:12‑14;0;15:3‑7)	S?P?	CO	G	I	Q
57. Lost Coin (0;0;15:8‑10)	S/P?	CO	NG?	I	Q
58. Prodigal Son (0;0;15:11‑32)	P	CO	NG?	X	SM
59. Dishonest Steward (0;0;16:1‑9)	P	DO	N	I	SA
60. Rich Man & Lazarus (0;0;16:19‑31)	E	DO	N	I
61. Unprofitable Servants (0;0;17:7‑10)	S	D	G	X	QA
62. Unjust Judge (0;0;18:1‑8)	P	D	N	I	SQ
63. Pharisee & Publican (0;0;18:9‑14)	E	D?O?	N	X	S
64. Pounds (0,cp #40;0;19:11‑27)	PA	CD	N	X	S