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

imagination and are unconvincing. In the case of Ps. 23, neither a bad shepherd nor a lost
sheep appear, in contrast to his contention. 47 Furthermore, the words, mean merely
the sense of reviving life through several times, not the sense of repentance as Bailey’s
argument, namely, “he brings me back.” Even though the parable is more likely based on the
entirety of shepherd imagery in the OT, not on a single text, of them Ezek. 34 alone has more
similarity with the parable. Ezek 34:4, 16 uses both words in Matthew and Luke respectively
to describe the lost sheep, that is, ‘to stray’ and ‘to become lost’. In Ezek 34, God himself will
seek out his sheep, care for them, judge their oppressors and raise a Davidic shepherd over
them to tend the flock of sheep, thereby carrying the idea of sin and forgiveness, and
messianic prophecies. 48
6-2-3. The Interpretation of the Parable
In view of the fact that the introduction of the parable makes a point of ‘if you… how much
49
more God?’ through the rhetorical question with a feature of a fortiori, it is possible to say
that the shepherd’s actions and attitudes portray that of God. 50
The point, in this case, is that
if a shepherd will go looking for a lost sheep and rejoice when he finds it, how much more
will God search for a lost one and rejoice when he finds it? Moreover, it is well attested by
the imagery of a sheep and a shepherd in the OT identifying them as God, the leaders and
hope for God’s people.
The parable also has christological significance, since Jesus’ actions are of God. Keeping
in mind that Jesus defends his eating with sinners in terms of God’s character, that God is like
a shepherd searching for the lost, it is very clear that he indeed is performing God’s work, as
well as reflecting the messianic prophecies as the Davidic shepherd (Ezek. 34:23). He,
212; Jacob and the Prodigal, 121-218; “Jacob and the Prodigal: A New Identity Story,” Theological Review 18
(1997), 54-72.
47. Bailey believes that the shepherd in the parable is a bad shepherd in that Jesus accuses the Jewish leaders
through this image, while the shepherd becomes a good shepherd in that the shepherd reflects Jesus’ own
ministry. Bailey, “Psalm 23 and Luke 15: A Vision Expanded,” IBS 12 (1990), 54-71; Finding the Lost, 67-92,
194-212.
48. Snodgrass, Stories with Intent, 107.
49. This feature of Luke 15 as a whole makes the culmination of the sequence in the third story, presenting a
cherished animal (a sheep), a valued object (a coin) and a treasured person (younger brother) in order. Frans
Jozef van Beeck, “Lost and Found in Luke 15: Biblical Interpretation and Self-Involvement,” ExpTime 114 (12,
2003), 399-404, especially 400.
50. Against this, both Crossan and Scott do not view the shepherd as God, but a seeker who searches for the
advent of the kingdom, and a foolish shepherd who gambles all in an uncertain situation, respectively. Crossan,
In Parables, 72; Scott, Hear Then the Parable, 417.
70