Parables thread

[Radagast]

I thought it might be interesting to have a kind of Bible study on the N.T. parables -- working through, say, one parable every week or so.

I'll start with one of the most famous, the Good Samaritan (Luke 10):

29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?”

30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34 He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’

36 Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbour to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”

This is the actual road:



And here is an illustration from 1670, by Jan Wijnants:



What do people think the parable means?

 

[graceandpeace]

That we should be merciful to all. Everyone is a neighbor. We shouldn't assume either that because of someone being a different race, class, etc (a "Samaritan") that they are incapable of mercy or that they are not right in God's eyes.

 

[Radagast]

That we should be merciful to all. Everyone is a neighbor.

I agree.

There is also an ancient allegorical interpretation of the parable. To quote Origen:

"The man who was going down is Adam. Jerusalem is paradise, and Jericho is the world. The robbers are hostile powers. The priest is the Law, the Levite is the prophets, and the Samaritan is Christ. The wounds are disobedience, the beast is the Lord’s body, the [inn], which accepts all who wish to enter, is the Church. And further, the two denarii mean the Father and the Son. The manager of the [inn] is the head of the Church, to whom its care has been entrusted. And the fact that the Samaritan promises he will return represents the Savior’s second coming."

I'm with Calvin and others in thinking this misinterprets the parable. However, some iconography and artwork, in portraying the Good Samaritan with a Christ-halo, does reflect this allegorical view.

 

[7angels]

i believe this parable is showing us that we are to treat others without concern of payback or any other form of compensation. we just need to do the best we can in every situation to make other people's lives more happy and enjoyable.

too many times we come across people in a similar circumstance and many of us just ignore the person or offer to get that person help and justify themselves by attempting to do something that requires little or no hassle.

we need to step up and take responsibility to help no matter if we are short on time or whatever the excuse may be. but it is easier said then done though which is why finding people who truly help others are so rare.

God bless

 

[Receiver]

The pouring in oil and wine and taking to the inn and leaving the inn keeper payment in advance with more on his return shows The good Samatitan in Jesus, who also works through those who preach his gospel of ministering God's Spirit and building the church he set up.

 

[Radagast]

The pouring in oil and wine and taking to the inn and leaving the inn keeper payment in advance with more on his return shows The good Samatitan in Jesus, who also works through those who preach his gospel of ministering God's Spirit and building the church he set up.

This is the allegorical interpretation I mentioned in post #3, which Calvin calls "too absurd to deserve refutation."

What makes you think this parable is an allegory? It's missing the usual cues such as "the Kingdom of Heaven is like...."

Instead, it seems to be answering a specific question: "And who is my neighbour?"

 

[Receiver]

This is the allegorical interpretation I mentioned in post #3, which Calvin calls "too absurd to deserve refutation."

What makes you think this parable is an allegory? It's missing the usual cues such as "the Kingdom of Heaven is like...."

Instead, it seems to be answering a specific question: "And who is my neighbour?"

A parable is an allegory, likening some spiritual truth to something physical that is understood already, to aid understanding. It is not to be taken literally.

Jesus is not saying one *literally* pours in oil and wine and takes injured people to the nearest public house.

He doesn't say "the kingdom of heaven is like", because it's about getting people into that kingdom, rather than the kingdom itself. Other parables deal with that.

 

[Receiver]

p.s. a neighbour is one who behaves as one who sees it as their responsibility to care, to relieve the problem.

the problem here isn't literally that people are physically bleeding. The person is going away from Jerusalem (God's city) and to Jericho, the World. The thieves are those that have robbed people of the truth, leaving them dying spiritually and walking away from God.
These people are avoided by religious people, seen as "Christ-rejecters", fall-aways. But true Christians see that they never heard the true gospel so they take the time to minister to them and pray with them to receive the Spirit and introduce them to the true church where they will be freely cared for.
Then they become real neighbours - living side-by-side spiritually.

 

[Radagast]

A parable is an allegory, likening some spiritual truth to something physical that is understood already, to aid understanding.

Well, a parable is a parable. It may or may not be an allegory. The question here is: what is the topic of the parable? Is it about Jesus, or is it about "who is my neighbour?" (in the context of "love your neighbour as yourself").

It is not to be taken literally.

I never said it was.

He doesn't say "the kingdom of heaven is like", because it's about getting people into that kingdom, rather than the kingdom itself. Other parables deal with that.

Other parables talk about "getting people into that kingdom" too, but the parables in, for example, Mark 4 are explicitly linked by Jesus to the Kingdom.

I realise that the allegorical interpretation of this parable (that it's about Jesus) is an ancient interpretation, but I'm not seeing any reasons for it being correct, especially when there's such an obvious alternative (that it's exactly what it seems to be: a response to a specific question).

I know that many Orthodox hold to the allegorical interpretation. Can any Orthodox members explain the reasons?

 

[Hawkiz]

That we should be merciful to all. Everyone is a neighbor. We shouldn't assume either that because of someone being a different race, class, etc (a "Samaritan") that they are incapable of mercy or that they are not right in God's eyes.

This^^^.

And it then fits perfectly with 'love your neighbor as yourself'. None of us like it when our fellow man approaches us with an air of superiority. We don't like to be scoffed at, mocked, or ignored. It wounds us when we are in pain and others don't have time to stop and help. Thus we should recognize our need to lift others around us up, even when 'the world' might tell us to ignore them, walk away, be selfish...

Love the idea of a biblical parable study! Count me in!

Peace in Christ

 

[Hawkiz]

I agree.

There is also an ancient allegorical interpretation of the parable. To quote Origen:

"The man who was going down is Adam. Jerusalem is paradise, and Jericho is the world. The robbers are hostile powers. The priest is the Law, the Levite is the prophets, and the Samaritan is Christ. The wounds are disobedience, the beast is the Lord’s body, the [inn], which accepts all who wish to enter, is the Church. And further, the two denarii mean the Father and the Son. The manager of the [inn] is the head of the Church, to whom its care has been entrusted. And the fact that the Samaritan promises he will return represents the Savior’s second coming."

I'm with Calvin and others in thinking this misinterprets the parable. However, some iconography and artwork, in portraying the Good Samaritan with a Christ-halo, does reflect this allegorical view.

I had not read this from Origen before, thank you for sharing. I can 'see' SOME of the connections here, but not quite all...I'm not with Calvin and I won't dismiss reading it this way completely, but I also can't quite get on board with every link he is trying to make. Specifically, I have trouble with Christ being the beast. I mean, I think I can guess that Origen means that Christ carries us to salvation/redemption, but I have always viewed Christ as the Samaritan...since He is the one who stops and picks up the most wounded among us...and since We are told in so many places in Scripture to emulate Christ, it works for me to view Him as the Samaritan, and I am to follow His example in my life. As with all parables, I think there is 'some' room for variance, so long as the main message isn't lost...and I think the main point here comes down to the phrase 'What would Jesus do?'. If we see our neighbor wounded in sin, do we ignore that pain and walk on the other side? Or do we walk on the other side by acting self-righteous? Or do we stop and recognize the pain of sin and help that person heal?

Peace in Christ

 

[Radagast]

As with all parables, I think there is 'some' room for variance, so long as the main message isn't lost...and I think the main point here comes down to the phrase 'What would Jesus do?'.

It's a little strange to me that such a famous parable would have such very different interpretations (is it about Jesus, or about how we should love our neighbour?)

But you're right, "What would Jesus do?" links the two interpretations.

Specifically, I have trouble with Christ being the beast. I mean, I think I can guess that Origen means that Christ carries us to salvation/redemption, but I have always viewed Christ as the Samaritan...

Origen says Christ is the Samaritan and the beast is His body. Even when we're certain that a parable is an allegory, it's possible to over-allegorise.

 

[Radagast]

some iconography and artwork, in portraying the Good Samaritan with a Christ-halo, does reflect this allegorical view.

This is an example of an icon based on the allegorical interpretation:

 

[Radagast]

Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376–444) doesn't seem to take the allegorical approach:

"Very skilfully therefore does the Saviour of all weave the parable of him who fell into the hands of thieves, saying, that when he was lying half dead, and in the last extremity of evil, a priest passed by, and in like manner a Levite, without feeling towards him any sentiment of humanity, or dropping upon him the oil of compassionate love; but rather, their mind was unsympathizing and cruel towards him. But one of another race, a Samaritan, fulfilled the law of love. Justly therefore He asked, which of these three he thinks was the sufferer's neighbour. And he said, 'He that wrought mercy with him.' And to this Christ added, 'Go you also, and act in like manner.'

You have seen, O lawyer, and it has been proved by the parable, that it is of no avail whatsoever to any man, to be set up by empty names, and to pride himself upon unmeaning and ridiculous titles, so long as the excellence of deeds does not accompany them. For the dignity of the priesthood is unavailing to its owners, and equally so is the being called learned in the law, to those who are so reputed, unless they excel also in deeds. For lo! a crown of love is being twined for him who loves his neighbour: and he proves to be a Samaritan." -- Cyril of Alexandria, Sermon #68 on Luke

 

[Radagast]

Martin Luther King, in his famous "I've Been to the Mountaintop" speech, had this to say about the parable :

"And so the first question that the priest asked, the first question that the Levite asked was, 'If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?'

But then the Good Samaritan came by, and he reversed the question: 'If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?'"

 

[Radagast]

.

 

[Radagast]

.

 

[Radagast]

There was less enthusiasm about the Good Samaritan than I'd hoped, but I'd like to next look at the parable of the Faithful Servant (Matthew 24:42-51, as well as Mark and Luke):

"42 Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. 43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

45 Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his master has set over his household, to give them their food at the proper time? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. 47 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. 48 But if that wicked servant says to himself, ‘My master is delayed’, 49 and begins to beat his fellow servants and eats and drinks with drunkards, 50 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know 51 and will cut him in pieces and put him with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

What do people think about this parable?

 

[Hawkiz]

There was less enthusiasm about the Good Samaritan than I'd hoped, but I'd like to next look at the parable of the Faithful Servant (Matthew 24:42-51, as well as Mark and Luke):

"42 Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. 43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

45 Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his master has set over his household, to give them their food at the proper time? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. 47 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. 48 But if that wicked servant says to himself, ‘My master is delayed’, 49 and begins to beat his fellow servants and eats and drinks with drunkards, 50 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know 51 and will cut him in pieces and put him with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.[/

I think it's fairly clear that the Master here is Jesus.

I think it is also obvious that we are being warned to be ready...right now today, as well as tomorrow and for the balance of our earthly lives, for His return. Just because we aren't looking out the window to see Christ coming down in this instant, we are warned that should be living our daily lives as if He is on His way. The Master not returning right now is not an excuse to be living un-Godly lives right now.

We see here that we are to be living (as in 'doing') our faith as if the Master is on His way to claim us. Not living our faith seems to put us in jeopardy of being called hypocrites and being sent to a place with weeping and gnashing of teeth...which is eternal separation from the Master, aka Hell. Fits perfectly with another of Jesus' teachings where we learn that not everyone that professes faith will be accepted by Christ. It is those who 'do what I tell you' and have faith who are following the Masters will. (Why do you call me Lord, Lord and not do as I tell you'. Luke 6:46)

This parable doesn't make a very good case for those who would claim that works don't matter to salvation...Jesus's words seem to indicate in this parable that 'doing' what the Master commands does matter...'blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes.' (So what does it mean to be blessed? When the context of the next few verses shows He'll awaits those who go against the master's will, I think to be blessed here points to Heaven). For we certainly see that those who go against the master are condemned upon his return...there is no 'gnashing of teeth' in Heaven, so we can't expect that those who are disobedient are there, so they must be somewhere else. Again, I think that suggests Hell.

Since salvation is by Grace alone, how does that fit? I think we can see that the necessity of Grace still applies: for even if we are doing what the master wants, we will all come up short of what he would do, and thus we all still require Grace. And we all still need faith since faith is our way of accepting Grace and it is faith which will show us what exactly the will of the Master is in our lives. Then we have to apply that faith (faith without works is dead) to how we live. Do we live and breathe our faith or do we profess a faith but then live outside of the will of the Master?

The entire message of the parable reflects perfectly back to Christ's teaching that we love our neighbor as ourselves.

Peace in Christ

 

[Radagast]

I think it's fairly clear that the Master here is Jesus.

I think it is also obvious that we are being warned to be ready...right now today, as well as tomorrow and for the balance of our earthly lives, for His return. Just because we aren't looking out the window to see Christ coming down in this instant, we are warned that should be living our daily lives as if He is on His way. The Master not returning right now is not an excuse to be living un-Godly lives right now.

I think you explain it very well.

We see here that we are to be living (as in 'doing') our faith as if the Master is on His way to claim us.

I think so too. Faith without works is dead, as you say.

Calvin comments on verse 48:

"Christ briefly points out the source of that carelessness which creeps upon wicked servants. It is because they trust to a longer delay, and thus of their own accord involve themselves in darkness. They imagine that the day when they must render an account will never come; and, under the pretext of Christ’s absence, they promise themselves that they will remain unpunished. For it is impossible but that the expectation of him, when it does occur to our minds, shall shake off sleep, and still more, that it shall restrain us from being carried away by wicked sensuality. ...

At the same time, Christ takes a passing glance at the ease with which insolence grows, when a man has once shaken off the bridle, and given himself up to sinning. For Christ does not represent to us a servant who is merely dissolute and worthless, but one who rises up in an outrageous manner to disturb the whole house, who wickedly abuses the power committed to him, exercises cruelty on his fellow-servants, and wastefully spends the property of his master, whom he treats with open ridicule."

St John Chrysostom has a similar explanation:

"But if any one should say, Do you see what a thought has entered into his mind, because of the day's not being known, 'my Lord,' he says, 'delays His coming?' we should affirm, that it was not because the day is not known, but because the servant is evil. Else wherefore came not this thought into the heart of the faithful and wise servant. For what, even though the Lord tarry, O wretched man, surely you look that He will come. Why then do you not take care? ...

But you, when you have received, so far from giving, dost even beat. And yet if not to give be blame, what excuse is there for beating? But this, it seems to me, He speaks, hinting at the insolent, and the covetous, and indicating the charge to be heavy, when they beat them, whom they were commanded to feed."