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

Jesus’ words and deeds have a fundamental openness towards non-Jewish people, starting
with a Samaritan atmosphere (9:52-56). In so doing, Luke, through the travel narrative,
invites his reader to follow Jesus on his way and learn his teaching. 28 After determining the
delineation of the travel narrative, 29 Noël sets out the discussion of the double love command
(10:25-28) in the travel narrative, so as to show that Luke is also influenced by Mark, and to
seek the plausibility of some of the interpretations of the great interpolation as a whole. He
claims in the course of this that believing that Q is behind 10:25-28 is unnecessary, and that
Luke depends exclusively on Mark without reference to any other material which is available
to him. On the whole, his emphasis is laid on methodology, in which both a diachronic and
synchronic reading must be used in the Lukan travel narrative, since in his view, the
diachronic reading has been underestimated in recent literature. 30 Yet, with respect to
demonstrating that Luke could have composed 10:25-28 without reference to any other
source or tradition, it is inconclusive. Even though it is disputed at the present time, a Q
version of the love commandment or Luke’s dependence on Mt 22:34-40 is largely viewed as
Luke’s source. 31
2-3. Chiastic Structure
It has been proposed that chiastic (a b b’ a’) and concentric (a b c b’ a’) structures are the
interpretation keys for the travel narrative. Proponents of the chiastic structure seek to unveil
the purpose of the section, paying particular attention to similar themes, motifs and stories
repeated within its structure. The centre of the chiasm is generally a turning point which
contains the climax or the most important ideas, with the centre being parallel to the extremes.
The survey shows that the use of chiasmus can play a mnemonic role, with aesthetic and
32
conceptual function. Proposals of chiasmus concerning the Lukan central section are
extended in slightly different ways by F.O. Fearghail, R.S. Reid and Paul Borgman. I will
briefly examine the chiastic structure approach to travel narrative as these proposals appeared.
Showing a chiasmus as the basic structure of the Journey, M.D. Goulder drives a wedge
in the debate of an amorphous miscellany, such as incident, discourse, parable, polemic,
28. Ibid., 391-95.
29. Ibid., 249-328.
30. Ibid., 329-89, he mainly deals with source-criticism as a diachronic reading.
31. For more on defenders for this argument, see Noël, The Travel Narrative in the Gospel of Luke:
Interpretation of Lk 9:51-19:28, 335 n. 1257, 337 n. 1262 and 339 n. 1268.
32. Talbert, Literary Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Acts, 81; Blomberg, “Midrash,
Chiasmus, and The Outline of Luke’s Central Section,” 234.
216