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

the parables, I believe it important that we take the gospel contexts into consideration for the
interpretation of the parables as a vital factor, since literary work, particularly narratives, if
we see the Gospels as narratives, 14 retains narrative unity in their works 15 but also the
parables, as we shall see later, have allegorical features where some of these details at least
point beyond themselves to realities at times in the gospel context. The study of how a shorter
narrative coheres and functions together within their larger narrative is best explanined in
Gerard Genette’s Narrtive Discourse: An Essay in Method. 16 According to his theory, the
main types of relationships that can connect a shorter narrative (the parables) to their larger
narrative (Luke) can be divided into three relationships such as direct causal, thematic, and no
explicit relationship. 17 The parables fall in the category of thematic relationship in which the
shorter narrative takes the position of contrast or analogy to the larger narrative. 18 The
parables shed light on the meaning of the narrative in that it recapitulates the previous saying
and narrative of Jesus, and foreshadows what would take place, but also should be interpreted
in light of the narrative where the meaning of the parables is determined by the narrative plot
or scheme. 19
The parables stand in fundamental relationship to the story as a whole, and
14. It is unnecessary to discuss that the gospels presume to be narratives, for modern literary critics have already
seen them so and produced many researches. For narrative studies of Luke-Acts in particular, see Robert
Maddox, The Purpose of Luke-Acts (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1982) and Charles H. Talbert,
Literary Patterns, Theological Themes, and the Genre of Luke-Acts (SBLMS 20, Missoula, Mont: Scholars
Press, 1974). In relation to the contention that the gospel presentation of the parables limits the variety of
possible readings by providing a content underlining certain aspects, I will not say much, since this phenomenon,
namely, restriction of the variety of readings is natural when a story as a parable is embedded in larger narrative
as the gospels. Moreover, we should postulate the Gospel narratives as secondary additions, not original
situations, since it is the intention of the evangelists with the gospel presentation of the parables to apply their
gospel narrative to their situations rather than to limit the variety of readings.
15 . For the same point of view, see Hans-Josef Klauck, Allegorie und Allegorese in synoptischen
Gleichnistexten (Munster: Aschendorff, 1978); Drury, The Parables in the Gospels: History and Allegory; Noel,
‘Parables in Context: Developing a Narrative-Critical Approach to Parables in Luke’; Tannehill, The Narrative
Unity of Luke-Acts: A Liteary Interpretation, vol 1. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986); Donahue, The Gospel
in Parable (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988); Birger Gerhardsson, “If We Do Not Cut the Parables out of
Their Frames,” NTS 37 (1991), 321-335; David B. Gowler, Host, Guest, Enemy, and Friend: Portraits of the
Pharisees in Luke and Acts (New York, Bern, Frankfurt, Paris: Peter Lang Press, 1991); Warren Carter and John
Paul Heil, Matthew’s Parables, CBQMS 30 (Washington, DC: The Catholic Biblical Association of America,
1998); Stephen Curkpatrick, “Parable Metonymy and Luke’s Kerygmatic Framing,” JSNT 25.3 (2003), 289-307.
16. Gerard Genette, Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method, trans. Jane E. Lewin (Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell
University Press, 1980), 227-252.
17. Ibid., 232-233.
18. David B. Gowler in his book, ‘What Are They Saying About the Parables?’ as opposed to Gerard Genette,
argues that this relationship between the gospel context and the parables is not dialectic but dialogic. David B.
Gowler, What Are They Saying About the Parable? (New York: Mahwah, N.J. Paulist Press, 2000), 38.
19. Drury, The Parables in the Gospels: History and Allegory, 39-61.
19