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

4. The Barren Fig Tree (13:6-9)
4-1. The Literary Context of the Parable
The context preceding the story (13:1-9) deals with the theme of the delay of the parousia and
the judgment: You must be ready, because the son of man and the master of that servant will
come at an hour when you do not expect him (12:35-48). His coming will bring judgment and
division (12:49-53). You should wisely interpret the signs of the times and act accordingly
(12:54-59). 1 Just as you must be ready for the son of man’s return at all times, so the church
must be ready for their Lord’s return at all times. The theme of it being absolutely necessary
to discern and respond appropriately to the eschatological crisis runs continuously through
the following story (13:1-9). 2
Is the connection between the parable and its context (13:1-5) original? In technical terms,
it is impossible to determine whether the two were connected by Jesus, or by Luke, or in the
tradition before Luke. In answering this question, Nolland contends that the close parallel
relationship between 13:2-3 and 12:4-5 shows us the possibility of 13:1 having stemmed
from the redactor of the parable, who has also been responsible for bringing the two units
together, based on the argument of G. Schwarz.
Luke in particular emphasizes the continuity of thought
between this story (13:1-9) and the chapter preceding it by means of the adverbial phrase
.
1. Talbert, Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Third Gospel, 143-46.
2. Reading the verb as “come” rather than “be present”, Bailey argues that the verb makes a
break between 13:1-5 and preceding passages. In view of the flow of thought between 13:1-5 and preceding
passages, his contention is not cogent. Bailey, Through Peasant Eyes: More Lucan Parables, Their Culture and
Style, 75; A.W. Martens, “The Parable of the Unproductive Fig Tree (Luke 13:6-9),” in ed., R.N. Longenecker,
The Challenge of Jesus’ Parables (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing, 2000), 157-76, here 169.
3. Nolland, Luke, 718-19; G. Schwarz, “Lukas 13:1-5: Eine Emendation,” NovT 11(1969), 121-26.
4. W.R. Farmer, “Notes on a Literary and Form-Critical Analysis of Some of the Synopic Material Peculiar to
Luke,” NTS 8 (1961-62), 305-306. In contrast, Jeremias claims that the historic present, in v.8 may
indicate to have made use of tradition material. He views the historic present in Luke’s parables as evidence of
traditional material on the grounds that Luke usually tries to avoid the historic present, and that Luke even
removed eighty nine of ninety of the historic presents transmitted by Mark material. Jeremias, Parables, 182-83.
5. For the same case, see Luke 10:25-38; 12:13-21, 41-48; 14:15-24; 15:1-7.
47
3
On the other hand, W.R. Farmer insists on the unity between the parable and its context
through the strong affinity in structure with 15:1-31, although such a structure was created by
4
the need of the early church. Given the fact that some of the parables in Luke’s Gospel, as I
have pointed out previously, begin with comments from individuals or a dialogue between an
individual and Jesus, it indicates that the comments and the dialogue play an important role in
understanding the parables. 5
Such a literary construction usually serves Luke’s purpose of