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

Chapter 3
A Methodological basis for an analysis of the Lukan Parables
Basically, I believe that the parables have metaphorical and narrative characteristics, at least
in so-called narrative parables. It appears that the metaphorical characteristic in the parables
elicits the allegorical approach and polyvalent meanings in connection with the interpretation
of the parables. Furthermore, the narrative characteristic in the parables makes us consider
the literary context of the parables as well as methods for a narrative analysis of the parables.
Taking all this into consideration, it is important at the outset to adopt a methodological
criterion for the analysis of the Lukan Parables. 1
In this chapter, I intend to build up some
methodological bases resulting from my awareness of the lack and failure of the
interpretation of the parables.
1. The parables must be interpreted.
Before going further, I would like briefly to deal with the following question: Can the
parables be interpreted? There are those who believe that the parables either do not need to be,
2
or cannot be interpreted. This stems from the point of view that sees the parables as
“language events” 3
in modern literary analysis, particularly in relation to the emphasis on
metaphor. According to modern literary criticism, metaphors and parables cannot be reduced
to literal and abstract interpretations, nor are they simply illustrations and bearers of meaning.
1. With respect to methodology and hermeneutics, R. Zimmermann’s work which takes a new route in four steps
gives us an insight into the exegesis of the parables of Jesus, that is, a historical perspective, a traditionhistorical
perspective, the perspective of the literary form of the parables and a hermeneutic perspective. See
Ruben, Zimmermann, “How to Understand the Parables of Jesus. A Paradigm Shift in Parable Exegesis,” Acta
Theologica 29 (2009), 157-82; idem, Kompendium der Gleichnisse Jesu. Herausgegeben von Ruben
Zimmermann; in Zusammenarbeit mit Detlev Dormeyer, Gabi Kern, Annette Merz, Christian Münch, Enno
Edzard Popkes (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2007); idem, Hermeneutik der Gleichnisse Jesu.
Methodische Neuansätze zum Verstehen urchristlicher Parabeltexte; Herausgegeben von Ruben Zimmermann
unter Mitarbeit von Gabi Kern (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008).
2. The representative scholars who continually influence junior scholars with respect to this assertion are as
follows: Robert W. Funk, Language, Hermeneutic and the Word of God (New York: Harper & Row, 1966);
Paul Ricoeur, “Biblical Hermeneutics,” Semeia 4 (1975), 27-148; idem, The Rule of Metapher (Toronto and
London: University of Toronto Press, 1977); Sallie M. Te Selle, Speaking in Parables: A Study in Metaphor and
Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress; London: SCM Press, 1975); B.B. Scott, Jesus, Symbol-Maker for the Kingdom
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981); idem, Hear Then the Parable: A Commentary on the Parables of Jesus
(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989).
3. This term was rooted in the modern literary analysis by Robert W. Funk who, at the outset, introduced it from
Ernst Fuchs who opened the door of The New Hermeneutic, which was influenced by modern philosophic
thoughts of Martin Heidegger and Hans-Georg Gadamer. For the influence of existential philosophy on the
parables, see Eta Linnemann, Jesus of the Parables (New York: Harper & Row, 1966).
16