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

In the interrogative parable 5 , where does the question beginning in 11:5 end? Even though the
syntax is clumsy with a number of paratactic clauses, the question clearly extends to v. 7
which follows Jesus’ answer to his own question. 6 The parable begins with the formula
“Who from you” which appears eleven times in the Gospels, 7
In Middle Eastern customs, a host, as Bailey pointed out, might well provide more food
than was needed as a mark of respect.
including seven times in
Luke’s Gospel (cf. 11:5, 11; 12:25; 14:5, 28; 15:4; 17:7). In each case, with this formula, each
story starts with a simple question as to whether anyone would do some hypothetical action.
All expect a negative response as the rhetorical effect, namely, “no one.” Taken like this, the
whole point is ‘no one’ would say such a thing. In other words, it is unthinkable, according to
the customs of the day, that a visitor not be heartily welcomed and be provided with food and
lodging.
8
The saying in v. 6 “I have nothing to set before him”
might mean that, given the customs of generous hospitality, I do not have such foods to treat
a guest, rather than do not have any food. The petitioner probably tried to provide his friend
with the best thing, such as an unbroken loaf and an ample quantity of bread. He would be
aware of who had baked recently since baking was openly done in the community oven at
that time. He goes to his friend who baked bread and asks for help, “Friend, lend me three
loaves of bread” (v. 6).
The main point in v. 7 is as to whether the response of the petitioned is conceivable. In
view of the fact that generous hospitality is not only the duty of a host but also common
responsibility of the village to some extent, it is nothing but trivial excuses. It is
inconceivable that the petitioned cannot give the petitioner anything because of the bother of
unlocking a door and fear of making a noise that might awake his children in bed. Such a
suggestion would have shocked the audience in their social community based on honour and
hospitality.
5. It is not correct, as Snodgrass has pointed out, to change the question to a statement in translations such as
“Suppose one of you” (NIV and NRSV). See Snodgrass, Stories with Intent, 442.
6. 11:5-7 forms a unity into the Semitic tripartite combination of an interrogative noun-clause whose subject is
ti,j, a relative clause setting out the real presupposition, and an assertive clause which constructs the apodosis in
relation to the protasis formed by the above the interrogative noun-clause and the relative clause. D.R.
Catchpole, Q and ‘The Friend at Midnight’ (Luke 11:5-8/9), 412.
7. Matt 6:27; 7:9; 12:11; John 8:46.
8. Bailey, Poet and Peasant, 121-123. It is excessive conjecture, however, that the petitioner intents to wander
from house to house to get various foods except for three loaves in the middle of the night. Rather than such an
excessive behaviour at midnight is out of courtesy in Eastern customs, although honour and shame center about
their society and culture.
37