the role of the lukan parables in terms of the purpose of luke's gospel

1-4. Lk 19:28 16
17
J. Székely agrees with the majority of the exegetes that the travel narrative ends with 19:28.
He advances similarities of a new beginning between 9:52-56 and 19:29-40 in sending the
disciples to prepare for Jesus’ arrival, as well as in the rejection of Jesus. In addition, 19:28
forms a literary inclusio with 9:51, and Bethany and the Mount of Olives form a certain
16. For those who view 19:27 or 28 as the end of the travel section, see G.B. Caird, The Gospel of St. Luke
(London: A & C. Black, 1968), 139; Conzelmann, The Theology of St Luke, 63-64; George Ogg, “The Central
Section of the Gospel according to St Luke,” NTS 18 (1971), 39-53; Frederick W. Danker, Jesus and the New
Age: A Commentary on St. Luke’ Gospel, 123; Simon J. Kistemaker, “The Structure of Luke’s Gospel,” JETS 25
(1982), 33-39. Kistemaker divided the Gospel of Luke into three segments (3:1-9:50; 9:51-19:27; 19:28-21:38)
except for the introduction (Chapters 1-2) and conclusion (Chapters 22-24). See also Fitzmyer, The Gospel
According to Luke, 1242; Longenecker, “Taking up the Cross Daily: Discipleship in Luke-Acts,” 50-76, here 64;
J. Székely, Structure and Theology of the Lucan ‘Itinerarium’ (Budapest: Szent Jeromos Katolikus Bibiátarsulat,
2008), 97-99; Noël, The Travel Narrative in the Gospel of Luke: Interpretation of Lk 9:51-19:28, 283-285;
Stephen Hultgren, “The Apostolic Church’s Influence on the Order of Sayings in the Double Tradition. Part II:
Luke’s Travel Narrative,” ZNW 100 (2009), 199-222.
17. Apart from the above suggestions, there are, to be sure, other proposals. Even though there is the argument
that the travel narrative ceases with 18:14, which concludes the “great interpolation,” the suggestion in recent
years is no longer acceptable because the limitations of the source critical approach have been exposed. J.
Kodell first finds an interlocking technique of Luke at the beginning and the end of the great interpolation (9:51-
18:14) by means of a thematic inclusio (9:46-48; 18:15-17). In so doing, he puts forward a major unifying theme
of the interpolation: “the disciples of Jesus must receive the kingdom like a little child.” Jerome Kodell, “Luke
and the Children: The Beginning and End of the Great Interpolation (Luke 9:46-56; 18:9-23),” CBQ 49 (1987),
415-430. As for the above suggestion, H.L. Egelkraut rightly refutes it, pointing out that without the parallel in
Mark no one would notice that a unit ends in Lk 18:14. On the other side of the coin, C.L. Blomberg argues that
the travel narrative is closed with the final passion prediction in 18:31-34, putting much emphasis on the passion
prediction (9:22; 9:44). On the one hand, 9:22 and 9:44 provide a literary border and theological perspective for
9:51-18:30. On the other hand, 18:31-34 provides an introduction to the following section with solemnity and at
the same time a climactic conclusion to the previous wandering as any in Luke’s gospel. In other words, the
final passion prediction functions as a pivotal transitional passage which simultaneously serves as a conclusion
to the preceding material and an introduction to forthcoming events. As a result, he comes to a conclusion that
Luke’s central section should be identified as 9:51-18:30 with a transitional phrase at 18:31-34. This proposal is
followed by J. Nolland who defends the view that the artificial travel narrative ends with 18:34. Luke from
18:35 not only provides the actual progression from Jericho to Jerusalem, but also forecasts what will occur in
Jerusalem. However, it is sufficient to view 18:31 as only a transitional passage, and not the beginning of a new
section, since after 18:31 Jesus is still travelling on his way, particularly around and in Jericho. I.H. Marshall
claims that the travel section ends with 19:10. The view that the Parable of Pounds is the end of the travel
narrative is absurd, for the parable does not look back but looks forward. The parable functions as a narrative
bridge between the two sections in the Gospel of Luke. For the contention of 18:14 as the end of the travel
narrative, see C.F. Evans, “The Central Section of St. Luke’s Gospel,” in ed., D.E. Nineham, Studies in the
Gospels: Essays in Memory of R.H. Lightfoot (Oxford, 1955), 37-53, here 42-50; B. Reicke, “Instruction and
Discussion in the Travel Narrative,” Studia Evangelica I (TU, 73, Berlin, 1959), 206-16. For the contention of
18:30/34 as the end of the travel narrative, see Blomberg, ‘The Tradition History of the Parables Peculiar to
Luke’s Central Section,’ 52-58, especially 56-58; Nolland, Luke, 528-29. For 19:10 as the delineation of the
travel section, see Marshall, Luke, 401; K. Paffenroth, The Story of Jesus according to L (JSNTSup 147,
Sheffied, 1997), 65.
202