PARABLES: DO YOU GET THE POINT?

 IT SHOULD BE NOTED AT THE OUTSET THAT EVERYTHING ABOUT THE TEACHING OF JESUS IN THE GOSPELS HOLDS TRUE, FOR THE PARABLES. NEED THEIR OWN BOOK? WHY? HOW COULD THESE SIMPLE,DIRECT LITTLE STORIES JESUS TOLD. ONE WOULD HAVE TO BE SLOW ON THE UPTAKE OF THE FIRST CLASS, TO MISS THE POINT OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN OR THE PRODIGAL SON.  THE VERY READING OF THOSE STORIES PRICK THE HEART. OR COMFORTS IT.  THE PARABLES HAVE SUFFERED BECAUSE OF ALL THEIR CHARM AND SIMPLICITY, THE PARABLES HAVE SUFFERED A FATE OF MISINTERPRETATION IN THE CHURCH, SECOND ONLY TO REVELATION. THE REASON FOR THE LONG HISTORY OF THE MISINTERPRETATION OF THE PARABLES CAN BE TRACED BACK TO SOMETHING JESUS HIMSELF SAID: AS RECORDED IN MARK 4:10-12 (AND PARALLELS, MATT.13:1O; LUKE 8: 9-10. WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF PARABLES, HE SEEMS TO HAVE SUGGESTED THAT THEY CONTAINED MYSTERIES FOR THOSE ON THE INSIDE, WHILE THEY HARDENED  THOSE ON THE OUTSIDE. BECAUSE  HE THEN PROCEEDED TO "INTERPRET" THE PARABLE OF THE SOWER. IN A SEMI-ALLEGORIAL, THIS WAS SEEN TO GIVE LICENSE TO THE HARDING THEORY AND ENDLESS ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATIONS. THE PARABLES WERE TO BE SIMPLE STORIES FOR THOSE ON THE OUTSIDE, TO WHOM THE "REAL" MEANINGS, "THE MYSTERIES" WERE HIDDEN; THESE BELONGED ONLY TO THE CHURCH BY   MEANS OF ALLEGORY. AND COULD BE UNCOVERED. THUS AS GREAT AND BRILLIANT SCHOLAR AS AUGUSTINE OFFERS THE FOLLOWING INTERPRETATION OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN: A CERTAIN MAN WENT DOWN FROM JERUSALEM TO JERICHO=ADAM
 JERUSALEM= HEAVENLY CITY OF PEACE, FROM WHICH ADAM FELL
 JERICHO= THE MOON AND SIGNIFIES ADAM MORTALITY
THIEVES= THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS
STRIPPED HIM=NAMELY, OF HIS IMMORTALITY
BEAT HIM=BY PERSUADING HIM TO SIN.
AND LEFT HIM HALF DEAD= AS A MAN HE LIVES, BUT HE DIED SPIRITUALLY, THEREFORE HE IS HALF DEAD
THE PRIEST AND THE LEVITE= THE PRIESTHOOD AND MINISTRY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
THE SAMARITAN=IS SAID TO MEAN GUARDIAN; THEREFORE CHRIST HIMSELF IS MEANT
BOUND HIS WOUNDS= MEANS BINDING THE RESTRAINT OF SIN
OIL=COMFORT OF GOOD HOPE
WINE= EXHORTATION TO WORK WITH A FERVENT SPIRIT
BEAST= THE FLESH OF CHRIST'S INCARNATION
INN= THE CHURCH
THE MORROW=AFTER THE RESURRECTION
TWO PENCE= PROMISE OF THIS LIFE AND THE LIFE TO COME
INNKEEPER =PAUL

 AS NOVEL AND INTERESTING AS ALL OF THIS MIGHT BE, ONE CAN BE SURE THAT IT IS NOT WHAT JESUS INTENDED. AFTER ALL, THE CONTEXT CLEARLY CALLS FOR AN UNDERSTANDING OF HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS (" WHO IS MY NEIGHBOR?"), NOT DIVINE TO HUMAN; AND THEIR IS NO REASON TO THINK THAT JESUS WOULD PREDICT THE CHURCH AND PAUL IN HIS OBUSE FASHION. INDEED. IT IS EXTREMELY DOUBTFUL WHETHER MOST WERE INTENDED FOR FOR AN INNER CIRCLE AT ALL.  IN AT LEAST THREE INSTANCES LUKE SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT JESUS TOLD PARABLES TO PEOPLE WITH THE CLEAR INDICATION THAT THE PARABLES WERE TO BE UNDERSTOOD. MOREOVER, THE LAWYER TO WHOM JESUS TOLD THE PARABLES OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN UNDERSTOOD THE PARABLE AS DID THE CHIEF PRIESTS AND PHARISEES. THE PARABLE OF THE TENETS IN MATTHEW. IF WE HAVE TROUBLE AT TIMES UNDERSTANDING THE PARABLES, IT IS NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL ALLEGORIES FOR WHICH WE NEED SOME SPECIAL INTERPRETIVE KEYS. RATHER IT IS RELATED TO SOME THINGS WE SUGGESTED IN THE PREVIOUS CHAPTER ON THE GOSPELS. ONE OF THE KEYS TO UNDERSTANDING THE PARABLES LIES IN DISCOVERING THE ORIGINAL AUDIENCE.TO WHOM THEY WERE SPOKEN; AS WE NOTED, MANY TIMES THEY CAME DOWN TO THE EVANGELISTS WITHOUT A CONTEXT.
THE FIRST THING ONE MUST NOTE IS THAT NOT ALL THE SAYINGS LABELED PARABLES ARE OF THE SAME KIND. THERE IS A BASIC DIFFERENCE, FOR EXAMPLE, BETWEEN THE GOOD SAMARITAN (TRUE PARABLE), ON THE ONE HAND, AND THE LEAVEN IN THE MEAL(SIMILITUDE) ON THE OTHER, AND BOTH OF THESE DIFFER FROM THE SAYING, " YOU ARE THE SALT OF THE EARTH." (METAPHOR), OR "DO PEOPLE PICK GRAPES FROM THORNBUSHES, OR FIGS FROM THISTLES? "EPIGRAM).
 YET ALL OF THESE CAN BE FOUND FROM TIME TO TIME IN DISCUSSIONS OF THE PARABLES. THE GOOD SAMARITAN IS A TRUE PARABLE. IT IS A TRUE STORY,PURE AND SIMPLE, WITH A BEGINNING AND A ENDING; IT HAS SOMETHING OF A "PLOT."
 OTHER SUCH STORY PARABLES INCLUDE THE LOST SHEEP., THE PRODIGAL SON, THE GREAT SUPPER, THE LABORERS IN THE VINEYARD, THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS, AND THE TEN VIRGINS. THE LEAVEN IN THE MEAL, ON THE OTHER HAND IS A SIMILITUDE. WHAT IS SAID OF THE LEAVEN, OR THE SOWER, OR THE MUSTARD SEEDS. SUCH "PARABLES" ARE MORE LIKE ILLUSTRATIONS TAKEN FROM EVERYDAY LIFE.  LETS GO BACK TO OUR ANALOGY OF THE JOKE. THE TWO THINGS THAT CAPTURE THE HEARER OF A JOKE AND ELICIT A RESPONSE OF LAUGHTER ARE THE SAME TWO THINGS THAT CAPTURED THE HEARERS OF JESUS PARABLES., NAMELY THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE POINTS OF REFERENCE AND THE UNEXPECTED TURN OF THE STORY. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY POINTS OF REFERENCE CAN BEST BE ILLUSTRATED FROM A PARABLE OF JESUS THAT IS RECORDED IN ITS FULL ORIGINAL CONTEXT--- LUKE 7:40-42. IN THE CONTEXT  JESUS HAS BEEN INVITED TO DINNER BY A  PHARISEE NAMED SIMON. BUT THE INVITATION WAS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED AS BEING IN HONOR OF A VISITING RABBI. THE FAILURE TO OFFER JESUS EVEN THE COMMON HOSPITALITY OF THE DAY WAS SURELY INTENDED AS SOMETHING. WHEN THE TOWN PROSTITUTE FINDS HER WAY INTO THE PRESENCE OF THE DINERS AND MAKES A FOOL OF HERSELF OVER JESUS BY WASHING HIS FEET WITH HER TEARS AND WIPING THEM WITH HER HAIR., IT ONLY FORTIFIES THE PHARISEES' SUSPICIONS JESUS COULD NOT BE A PROPHET AND LEAVE UNCONDEMNED HIS KIND OF PUBLIC DISGRACE. JESUS KNOWING THEIR THOUGHTS, JESUS TELLS HIS HOST A SIMPLE STORY. TWO MEN OWED MONEY TO A MONEY LENDER. ONE OWED FIVE HUNDRED
 DENARII ( A DENARIUS WAS A DAYS WAGE);  THE OTHER OWED FIFTY. NEITHER COULD PAY, SO HE CANCELLED THE DEBTS OF BOTH. THE POINT: WHO DO YOU THINK, WOULD HAVE RESPONDED TO THE MONEY LENDER WITH THE GREATEST DISPLAY OF LOVE? THIS STORY NEEDED NO INTERPRETATION. THE WOMEN HEARD THE PARABLE AS WELL IDENTIFY WITH THE STORY. NOTE WELL: THIS IS NOT A ALLEGORY; IT IS A PARABLE. A TRUE ALLEGORY IS A STORY WHERE EACH ELEMENT IN THE STORY MEANS SOMETHING QUITE FOREIGN TO THE STORY ITSELF. THE POINT OF THE PARABLE IS NOT IN THE POINTS OF REFERENCE AS IT WOULD BE IN A TRUE ALLEGORY. ALLEGORY WOULD GIVE MEANING TO THE FIVE HUNDRED DENARII, THE FIFTY DENARII AS WELL AS TO ANY OTHER DETAILS ONE MIGHT FIND.THE POINT OF THE STORY IS TO BE FOUND IN THE INTENDED RESPONSE. IN THIS PARABLE ON SIMON AND  IT IS A WORD OF JUDGMENT AND FORGIVENESS TO THE WOMEN

.