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

2. The Interpretational Approaches of the Travel Narrative
Jesus’ long journey to Jerusalem is one of the most interesting themes, with distinctive
features in the Gospel of Luke. It is not only a difficult subject to tackle, but also a very
complex issue, which has not been definitively resolved. The interpretation of the travel
narrative is complicated largely due to the discrepancy between form and content. This part
of the Gospel is formally a journey of Jesus to Jerusalem (9:51; 13:22; 17:11; 19:11, 28). The
content of this part is, however, everything but narrative material for a travel narrative, but
consists of sayings as Jesus’ instruction and parenesis. F.J. Matera finds eleven discourses
accompanied with changes of time and place, which Jesus delivers in the travel narrative. It is
surveyed that the travel narrative is mostly comprised of Jesus’ discourses other than only a
few episodes, which are not discourses (13:10-21; 13:31-35; 14:1-6; 17:11-22). 1 On the other
hand, it is difficult to map out a clear itinerary of Jesus towards Jerusalem, since many
pericopes in the travel narrative only have some brief geographical indications, and still less
are vaguely connected to each other by a colourless introduction. Of the explicit indications
(9:51, 53; 13:22; 17:11; 18:31; 19:11, 28) which mention the journey and its destination,
17:11 seems to indicate that Jesus is still near to Galilee without a large advancement to
Jerusalem, although the story has progressed considerably. That is, “On the way to Jerusalem
he was passing along between Samaria and Galilee.” Rather than inform the readers of the
itinerary of Jesus to Jerusalem, implicit travel notices (9:56, 57; 10:1, 17, 38; 11:1; 13:10;
14:1, 25) seem to denote greater vagueness with respect to the itinerary. D.P. Moessner
enumerates the obstacles with the journey notices in incoherence, infrequency and
indefiniteness or vagueness. 2
At any rate, attempts to settle the discrepancy between form
and content in the travel narrative have been elaborated by different approaches. In what
1. Matera, “Jesus’ Journey to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51-19:46): A Conflict with Israel,” 57-77, here 65-66, argues
that the discourses develop the evaluative point of view which Jesus supports and tries to communicate to the
disciples. The evaluative assessment is the standpoint or the system of value one employs to evaluate the world.
A conflict of evaluative points of view between Jesus, Pharisees and lawyers shapes the plot of Luke’s narrative,
and as a result, the journey section informs the reader why and how Jesus came into conflict with Israel. Eleven
discourses which Matera singles out from the travel narrative are as follows: 10:2-16, 11:2-13, 11:17-36, 11:39-
52, 12:1b-13:9, 13:23b-30, 14:8-24, 14:26-35, 15:3-17:10, 17:22-18:14 and 19:12-27. It has already emerged
from the argument of Resseguie that the purpose of Luke’s central section is to sharply expose two conflicting
ideological points of view which have diametrically opposed ways of thinking and viewing the world. However,
he deals only with 14:14-33 as a test case to demonstrate the thesis, not the whole of Luke’s central section.
James L. Resseguie, “Point of View in the Central Section of Luke,” JETS 25 (1982), 41-47.
2. Moessner, Lord of the Banquet: The Literary and Theological Significance of the Lukan Travel Narrative, 14-
20, in addition to the above discrepancy, discusses two more discrepancies between form and content, under the
next heading, discrepancy between the traditions and the journey motif and discrepancy between provenance
and setting of the Journey.
206