Parable (Hastings' Dictionary)

The subject will be treated under five heads: Terminology, Christ’s Use of Parables, their Distribution in the Gospels, their Classification, and their Interpretation. 1. The Term παραβολή (παραβάλλω) means ‘a plac- ing of one thing beside another’ with a view te comparison. Trench contends that ‘this notion of comparison is not necessarily included in the word.’ But it appears as early as the word itself, and is very Seat (Plato, PAwd. 33 B; Arist. Top. i. 10. 5; Polyb. i. 2. 2).

From the original idea of ‘throwing beside’ come the derived meanings of ‘exposing,’ represented by παράβολος, and of ‘com- paring,’ represented by παραβολή. Latin writers use collatio on: in Cic.), umago (Cic. Sen. Hor.), and similitudo (Cic. Quint.) The Lat. VSS com- monly have pote (Mt 13% 18 ete.), which survives in the Fr. parole and through parabolare in parler ; but similitudo is fairly common, esp.

in Lk (4% 5% 6% 84 1216 136 2019 21%), But in most of these cases some representatives of the Old Lat., esp. a and d, have parabola. Conversely, many Old Lat. texts sometimes have similitudo where the Vulg. has parabola (Lk 12 158 18° 19"), In LXX παραβολή very commonly represents the Heb. mashal, which also implies comparison (Νὰ 237-18 2.48. 15. 20. 21.23 ete.), But mdshdl is also rendered παροιμία (Pr 11, Sir 6* 88 etc.), and θρῆνος (Is 14%), and προοίμιον (Job 271 291).

Like Bes- spiel in German, it sometimes indicates an ex- ample set up for edification or warning (Jer 24°, Mic 24, Wis 5%). When it means an utterance of deeper meaning than appears on the surface, it is sometimes joined with πρόβλημα (Ps 484 772, Hab 28), or αἴνιγμα (Dt 2857, Sir 398 47%), or διήγημα (2 Ch 7”, Ezk 172), or σκοτεινὸς λόγος (Pr 15).

The meaning of such dark utterances becomes clear through the application or comparison which is indicated ; and those who miss the application lose the true meaning of the parable, which is often a short saying, such as we should rather call a proverb (1S 1013 2418, Ezk 1272-28 182-8] K 482), In NT παραβολή is freq. in the Synoptic Gospels ; and, excepting He 99 1119, is found nowhere else.

It is generally used of a longer utterance or narra PARABLE (IN NT) tive intended to set forth a spiritual lesson (Mt 133. 18. 24. 81. 86 ete.) ; but sometimes of a short say- ing or proverb (Mt 15, Mk 3% 77, Lk 4% 05).

Of the other renderings of mashdal, neither θρῆνος nor προοίμιον is found in NT, while παροιμία (ropd, οἶμος) occurs only Jn 10° 16%”, 2 Ῥ 23, Originally παροιμία meant an out-of-the-way saying, or possibly a wayside saying, and hence was used of any didactic, bolic, or figurative utterance. Like παραβολή, it is used both of longer utterances or allegories (Jn 105) and shorter ones or proverbs (2 P 233) ; comp. κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν, Kowa τὰ τῶν φίλων (Philo, de Vita Mos. i. 28; de Abr. 40).

Most Lat. VSS distinguish παροιμία by rendering it pro- verbium, which is never meal for παραβολή. Eng. VSS render both words sometimes by ‘parable’ (Mt 218, Jn 10°), sometimes by ‘proverb’ (Lk 4%, Jn 16”), Tindale and the Genevan use ‘simili- tude’ for both (Mt 13%, Jn 10°), and are capricious in using both ‘ parable’ and ‘similitude’ for rapa- βολή; so also is Coverdale. As St.

John never uses παραβολή, and as there are no parables in the strict sense in his Gospel, it is unfortunate that RV retains ‘ parable’ in Jn 10°. Attempts at definitions of ‘parable,’ taken from Greek Fathers and others, are given in Suicer, 9.υ. παραβολή. Trench quotes several Lat. defini- tions from Jerome and later writers.

However it may be expressed, the main elements in a parable are two: (1) a saying, commonly in the form of a narrative, respecting earthly things, with (2) & spiritual or Nand pee. A fable differs from a parable in both these elements. It often distorts the earthly things in using them as a vehicle of instruction, making brutes and trees talk, and the like.

This a parable never does; for nature, as God’s wisdom made it, is far better adapted for teaching Divine truths than nature as man’s fancy can imagine it. And a fable never aims higher than human morality. At best it teaches prudence, industry, caution; and it often inculeates mere shrewdness, selfishness, and cun- ning. Hence the only fables found in Scripture are used by men for their own ends; by Jotham (Jg 95) and by Jehoash (2 Καὶ 145).

They are never employed by God’s prophets in conveying His mes- sage, nor by Christ in explaining His kingdom. In the direct teaching of Scripture, nothing is attributed to animals or plants which is not found in nature. Moreover, it is their relation to man that is made instructive (the sheep to the shepherd or the owner, the fig-tree to the vine- dresser or the owner), not that of sheep or trees to one another.

The mutual relations of brute to brute or of tree to tree are less fitted to illustrate the kingdom of God. Much the same holds good of a myth, when it is the natural product of primi- tive imagination, and not the artificial invention of an ingenious teacher. The latter are parables or fables rather than myths; ¢.g. the myths of Plato.

But the myth, while resembling the fable in not being bound by the facts of nature and in not teaching spiritual lessons, differs from both fable and parable in that the myth mingles truth and fiction, whereas the parable and the fable keep them apart. Those who frame or hear parables and fables know that the narrative is nothing, and is not set forth as being historical, although accidentally it may be so. Itis the lesson indicated by the narrative which is of value.

But the uncritical age which spontaneously generates and accepts myths makes no distinction between fable aad figure. The figurative narrative is re- es as actually true. In an allegory figure and act, or rather figure and interpretation, are not mixed, but are parallel, and move simultaneously, as in the allegory of the True Vine or of the Good Shepherd. PARABLE (IN NT) 663 As already indicated, the distinction which we draw between a Ὁ espace and a proverb is not found in the Gospels.

The evangelists call the short figura- tive sayings of Christ, no less than the longer narratives, parables (Mt 15, Mk 3% 711 Lk 6%), as also does Christ Himself (Lk 43, Mt 24%); pony because mdshdl is used for both, but mainly ecause both in pestis and in proverbs there is comparison, and the hearer has to catch the analogy in order to be instructed.

We may, if we like, give the name of a parable to Christ’s sayings about the salt of the earth, the lilies of the field, building on the sand, whited sepulchres (Mt δ᾽} 6% 7% 23”), fishers of men, light under the bushel (Mk 17 4"), a reed shaken with the wind, the green and the dry tree (Lk 7* 23"), living water, fields white unto harvest, a woman in travail (Jn 410. 85 1671), etc. ete. Not a few of these wn iy be expanded into a narrative without diffi- culty. 2.

The Use of Parables was familiar to the Jews,* and ancient Rabbinic writings are full of them; but as illustrations of truths already set forth, rather than as a means of conveying truths. In the hands of Christ the use of parables as vehicles of truth reached perfection. Just as His miracles are parables,—factum Verbi verbum nobis est, as Augustine says,—so His parables are miracles, both of literary beauty and of instructive power.

As elements of His teaching they had several pur- poses, some of which are obvious, while others He explained to His disciples (Mt 13!-, Mk 41-12, Lk 8°"), They served both to reveal and to veil the truth; and the truths with which they are specially concerned are the mysteries of ‘the king- dom of God.

’ They revealed these mysteries to those who deserved to know them and were capable of receiving them; and they concealed them from those who lacked these qualifications, And this penalis cecitas (Aug.) with regard to Divine truth when it is clothed in parables is not merely a fact (ὅτι, Mt) in the impenitent; it is designed (ἵνα, Mk, Lk) by God, in order to withhold the mysteries of the kingdom from the unworthy.

This withhold- ing is therefore a judgment; but a judgment which is merciful in its operation. It saves un- worthy hearers from the responsibility of knowin the truth and rejecting it, for they are not allow to recognize it. It saves them also from the guilt of profaning it, for herein Christ observes His own maxim (Mt 7°). Nor does the mercy end here. The parable puts the truth in a form which arrests the attention at the time, and which is easily re- membered afterwards.

Longum est iter per pra- cepta, breve et efficax per exempla (Sen. =p. 6) Those who are already receptive are caught at once; they get their lesson and do not forget it. Those who are not, although they get no lesson yet hear something which they remember, and which will convey the lesson to them, if ever they become capable of receiving it. Moreover, the vehicle of ha lesson being taken from very familiar objects, he who has once heard a parable of Christ is ikely to be often reminded of it.

Christ knew the grander scenery of Palestine ; yet His parables are taken, not from mountains and forests, cedars and palm-trees, but from things which are common, not only in Palestine, but almost throughout the world (Stanley, Sin. and Pal. p. 432). Thus teaching by parables is both educational and disciplinary. It is a marked illustration of the law, that to him who hath shall more be given, while from him who hath not even that which he seems to have shall be taken away.

The unreceptive hearer seems to have the opportunity of being instructed; but this is really withheld, because instruction is given in a form which, through his own fault, he cannot * Comp. 25 121%, Is 5, and see preceding article. PARABLE (IN NT),, αηδοτγβίαπά : ἀείσω συνετοῖς, θύρας δ᾽ ἐπίθεσδε βέβηλοι.

“ It is quite in harmony with this principle that, at the beginning of Christ’s ministry, His parables were occasional and brief; but, as opposition to Him increased, they became His usual mode of public instruction and were more elaborate. The chief purpose of parables is to instruct by means of the exquisite analogies which exist between things natural and things spiritual, and which are the outcome of the Divine Wisdom that fashioned both.

In them Christ ‘utters things which have been hidden from the foundation of the world’ (Mt 1335), for the whole universe is a parable, which hides God from the unworthy, while it reveals Him more and more to the devout. Schelling says that nature and history are to one another as parable and a ee (Philos. Schriften, ed. 1809, p. 457).

hrist makes both nature and history a parable, of which the kingdom of God is the interpretation ; and thus the whole world becomes a ‘ picture-gospel’ to those who can understand it. In His synagogue-teaching Christ expounded the book of the OT. In His parables He expounded the book of nature and of human life. In the one case the written letter, in the other the experience of facts, was used to reveal the spirit which inspires both.

By the facts of everyday life the parable shows how the principles of the higher life may be known; for the universe is the outward expression of the laws of the king- dom of God. It is remarkable that the Epistles, although they contain allegories and frequent similes, never exhibit anything which corresponds to the parables of our Lord.

The attitude of the writers to this element in His teaching is analogous to that of the evangelists to the title ‘the Son of Man,’ which they record as often used by Jesus of Himself, but which they never apply to Him themselves (Nésgen, Gesch. Jesu, p. 346). Reverence of this kind, whether conscious or not, renders the hypo- thesis that some of Christ’s parables have been altered by those who recorded them all the less probable.

It is more reasonable to believe that the differences between parables which have marked resemblances are the result of variations made by Jesus Himself. He certainly sometimes employed pairs of parables, in order the better to impress the required lesson upon His hearers; e.g.

the Treasure in the Field and the Pearl of great Price (Mt 13), the Ten Virgins and the Talents (251-53), the Garment and the Wine-skins (Lk 5°-), the Mustard-seed and the Leaven (13'8-1), the Rash Builder and the Rash King (14-), the Lost Shee and the Lost Coin (15"°), And it should be ΞΕ how often the effect of Christ’s parables is in- tensified by a contrast; e.g.

obedient and dis- obedient sons (Mt 21%), wise and foolish virgins (25"), profitable and unprofitable servants (25), heartless clergy and charitable Samaritan (Lk 10%), Dives and Lazarus (16), Pharisee and Publican (18°), ete. 3. The Distribution of the Parables in the Gospels is very unequal. In the narrower sense of the term there are no parables in Jn.

It is in harmony with the respective characteristics of the other three Gospels that Lk, who aims at com- pleteness, gives us most, and that Mk, who records events rather than discourses, gives us fewest parables. Only one parable is peculiar to Mk,—the Seed growing secretly (4%) ; and he gives three others, which are also in Mt and Lk,—the Sower, Mustard-seed, and Wicked Husbandmen.

Two are common to Mt and Lk,—the Leaven (Mt 13%, Lk 13”) and the Lost Sheep (Mt 18”, *See the anticipation of this principle in the symbolical teaching of the Pythagoreans as given by Stobwus, Serm. y. 72, ed. Gaisford, i. p. 164. PARABLE (IN NT) Lk 15). Of the remainder, eighteen are peculiar to Lk and ten to Mt. Lk’s eighteen include some of the most beautiful.

They are the Two Debtors, Good Samaritan, Friend at Midnight, Rich Foot, Watchful Servants, Barren Fig-tree, Chief Seats, Great Supper, Rash Builder, Rash King, Lost Coin, Lost Son, Unrighteous Steward, Dives and Lazarus, Unprofitable Servants, Unrighteous Judge, Pharisee and Publican, and the Pounds, The ten peculiar to Mt are the Tares, Hid Trea- sure, Pearl of great Price, Draw-net, Unmercifn] Servant, Labourers in the Vineyard, Two Sons, Marriage of the Kings Son, Ten Virgins, and the Talents.

* Reasons have been given above why the Marriage of the King’s Son in Mt should not be identified with the Great Supper in Lk, nor the Talents in Mt with the Pounds. The number of Christ’s parables cannot be satis- factorily determined, because of the difficulty of deciding what is to be regarded as a parable. Some, as Trench, omit one or two of those given above, as the Watchful Servants (Lk 12%) and the Chief Seats (Lk 14”).

But many would have to be added, if all the short parabolic sayings of Christ were included. The usual estimate is from thirty to thirty-five, of which about two-thirds are ee served by Lk, the majority of them being peculi to his Gospel. It is one of the many signs of inferiority in the spocuy pial Gospels that they contain no parables.

While they degrade miracles into mere arbitrary and unspiritual acts of power, they omit all that teaches of the deep relations between the seen and the unseen. 4. The Classification of the Parables is a problem which perhaps does not admit of a satisfactory solution. One of the simplest is that of Goebel in Die Parabeln Jesu, Gotha, 1880, which is followed by Edersheim in The Life and Teaching of Jesus the Messiah, i. p. 579.

He makes three groups, distin- ished by the time and place of delivery: (i.) those elonging to Christ’s ministry in and near Caper- naum, collected in Mt 13; (ii.) those belonging to the journeyings from Galilee to Jerusalem, re- corded in Lk 10-18 ; and (iii.) those belonging to the last days in Jerusalem. The first group mainly has reference to the kingdom of God as a whole, the second to the individual members of it, and the third to the judgment of the members of it.

Godet, in Schaff’s Herzog, suggests another arrangement into three groups, which is more elaborate. Out of thirty parables he regards six as showing the preparatory existence of the King- dom under the Jewish dispensation; viz. the Wicked Husbandmen, Marriage of the King’s Son, Great Supper, Strait Gate, Barren Fig-tree, and Two Sons. Six others show the realization of the Kingdom in the form of a Church ; viz. the Sower, Tares, Mustard-seed, ven, Draw-net, and Un- righteous Judge.

The remaining eighteen refer to the realization of the Kingdom in the life of indi- vidual members.

This group is subdivided ; nine being referred to those who are entering the King- dom (Lost Sheep, Lost Coin, Lost Son, Pharisee and Publican, Friend at Midnight, Hid Treasure, Pearl of great Price, Rash Builder, and Rash King), and nine to those who have already become members (Chief Seats, Labourers in the Vineyard, Unmerciful Servant, Good Samaritan, Unrighteous Steward, Dives and Lazarus, Rich Fool, Talents, and Ten Virgins).

But to put the Unrighteous Judge and the Friend at Midnight, which teach much the same lesson, into different classes, does not seem to be right. Nor does one see how the sheep, coin, and son could be lost, unless they * ‘St. Matthew’s are more theocratic, St. Luke’s more ethical ; St. Matthew’s are more parables of judgment, St. Luke’s of mercy’ (Trench). PARABLE (IN NT), were already members of the community. Lange, in his Life of Christ, i. p. 484, and in Herzog?, art.

‘ Gleichnis,’ makes another threefold classification. The first cycle treats of the Kingdom in its develop- ment; the second of its completion by acts of mercy ; the third of its completion by acts of judg- ment. Somewhat similar is the division made by Steinmeyer in Die Par. des Herrn, Berlin, 1884, into kerygmatic, pastoral, and judicial. A very elaborate classification is drawn out by Westcott in his Elements of the Gospel Harmony, App. Ὁ ; and Int. to the Study of the Gospels, App.

f He makes two main classes, of which the second has three divisions; and each of these divisions has three subdivisions, some of which are bisected or trisected. The chief featuresare these. I. Parables drawn from the material world; viz. the Sower, Tares, Seed growing secretly, Mustard-seed, and Leaven. 11. Parables drawn from the relations of man (i.) to the lower world; viz. the Draw-net, Fig-tree, Lost eee and Lost Coin: (ii.) to his ‘ow-men, e.g.

the Lost Son, Friend at Midnight, and Unrighteous Steward, οἷο. : (iii.) to Provid- ence ; viz. the Hid Treasure, Pearl of great Price, and Rich Fool. Thus the parables drawn from the relations of man to his fellows (which is not one of the main classes) are the largest group, being about two-thirds of the whole. Secondly, those under the head of man’s relations to Provid- ence might be assigned to man’s relations to the lower world; for to the lower world treasure, pearls, and crops belong.

Thirdly, the Tares and the Draw-net seem clearly to belong to the same group; and, if this is admitted, then the two groups to which they are respectively assigned may be merged in one. These changes would give us two main divisions: (i.) Parables drawn from man’s relations to the lower world; and (ii.) parables drawn from man’s relations to his fellows. Nosgen also, in his Gesch. Jesu, Miinchen, 1891, p. 342, makes two main classes, partly on the same lines as Goebel and Godet: (i.)

those which treat of the development of the Kingdom as a whole ; and (ii.) those which treat of the lives of individual mem- bers of it. And he regards this classification as indicated by Christ Himself, according as He uses or omits the formula ‘The kingdom of heaven is likened’ (Mt 13% 18% 22? 951), or ‘the kingdom of heaven is like’ (Mt 13%: %- 44. 4- 47 901), or ‘so is the kingdom of God’ (Mk 4%), Comp.

Mt 1115, Lk 7", Mk 4, Lk 131-20, It is probable that the three parables which are in all three Gospels are in some way typical: they are taken from seed-time, growth, and harvest. The Sower tells of the preparation for the kingdom in the hearts of the recipients; the Mustard-seed of its powers of development; and the Wicked Husbandmen of God’s long-suffering mercy and stern judgment upon those who persist in opposing it.

But it does not follow from this that a basis for classification is thus indicated. 6. In the Interpretation of Parables we have to be on our guard against the opposite dangers of ignoring important features, and attempting to make all the details mean something. No general rules can be given, for the amount of symbolical detail differs greatly in different parables. This is clear from those cases in which we have Christ’s own interpretations.

In the Sower nearly all the features have meaning; not only the seed and the various soils, but the birds, the heat, and the thorns. In the Tares several features are ex- lained : the sower, the good seed, the enemy, the es, the field, the harvest, and the reapers.

And several are left unexplained : the people sleep- ing, the enemy’s going away, the blade springing up, the servants of the householder, and the bind- ing of the bundles (Mt 13%"), In the Un- PARACLETE 665 righteous Steward the meaning of the parable as a whole is indicated, viz. the wisdom of using present opportunities as a provision for eternity (Lk 16%); but none of the details are interpreted ; and it is robable that they have no meaning.

Most of the ifficulties respecting this parable have been pro- duced by making the separate features of the Sry, mean something, especially the reduction in the bills. Nevertheless, the interpretations of the Sower and of the Tares forbid us to assert that each parable has one main lesson, and that when this is ascertained all the details may be ignored as meaningless.

Chrysostom seems to go too far when he declares οὐδὲ χρὴ πάντα τὰ ἐν ταῖς παραβολαῖς κατὰ λέξιν περιεργάζεσθαι, ἀλλὰ τὸν σκοπὸν μαθόντας, δι᾽ ὃν συνετέθη, τοῦτον δρέπεσθαι, καὶ μηδὲν πολυπραγμονεῖν περαιτέρω (in Mt. Hom. Ἰχὶν. 3). But the extravagant lengths to which some patristic commentators go in the interpretation of minute details, especially of numbers (e.g. on Mt 1355 25%, Lk 74 115 137), sprareked strong protests, as from Tertullian (de Pud.

9) and others, who sometimes erred in this way themselves. The question is well handled by Trench, whose third chapter is one of the best in his admirable work, Notes on the Parables, which for English readers is likely to remain the chief guide on the whole subject. LiTrgraTuRE.—In addition to works mentioned in the above article, the following may be consulted: Lisco, Die Parabeln Jesu, 1832-40, Eng. tr.

by Fairbairn, 1840; Buisson, Paraboles de τ Evangile, 1849; Guthrie, The Parables, 1866; Stier, Reden ἃ. Herrn, 1865-74, Eng. tr. by Pope, 1869; Arnot, The Parables of our Lord, 1870; Beyschlag, Die Gleichnissreden ἃ. Herrn, 1875; Thiersch, Die Gleichnisse Christi nach ihrer moral. und ‘ophet. Bedeut, betrachtet, 1875; Bruce, The Parabolic Teach- tng of Christ, 1882 ; Tamm, Der Realismus Jesu in seiner Gleich- nissen, 1886; Jiilicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, 1888, 1899 [see Sanday in Journ.

Theol. Stud. Jan. 1900]; Freystedt, Die Gleichnisse ἃ. Herrn, Predigten, 1896 ; Heinrici, art. ‘ Gleich- nisse Jesu’ in PRE%. Most Lives of Christ contain a discussion of the subject. See also Danz, Universalwoérterbuch, p. 727. A. PLUMMER.