01. The Word 'parable'
CHAPTER I THE WORD ’PARABLE’ IN addition to their attraction as a subject of absorbing interest the Old Testament Parables make a strong historical, moral and spiritual appeal as a background for much that we read in the New Testament. More detailed study than one can possibly reproduce here has given the conviction that Jesus was not only familiar with the Old Testament Parables and fond of recounting some of them, but that in narrating His own stories of the Kingdom He used forms of expression and symbolism with which His hearers were already familiar. “ The Rabbis, who made such large use of parables, were alive to their value as a method of teaching and for the purpose of vivid illustration “ (C. G. Montefiore, Rabbinic Literature and Gospel Teachings).
Jesus raised the parabolic method of teaching to a standard previously unattained and gave to it a value which the world has ever since appreciated. The Old Testament Parables merit at least a small share of this universal approbation because they had already provided the scheme, the system, the power and genius of parabolic teaching. “ We have ground to conjecture that such forms of composition must have been long, diligently and abundantly cultivated “(Kautzsch, Literature of the Old Testament).
Only a new spirit was required to impart a fresh interest to the system, and that came with the appeal of Jesus for a New Kingdom. Indeed, some of our Lord’s parables may be recognised as familiar Old Testament stories with the new idea of the Kingdom of God set in their heart. This appears in reading the parables of the Wicked Husbandmen and the Mustard Seed, which remind us of the parables of the Vineyard (Isa 5:1-7) and the Great Eagles (Eze 17:1-24).
Reared in the Old Testament atmosphere which inspired Him to use such metaphorical language as “ The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me “ or “ The stone which the builders rejected the same is become the head of the corner,” it is no surprise to find Jesus adapting the simplest and most obvious facts of life to the function of proclaiming the truth of the Kingdom of God.
Between the parables of the two Testaments there is a wide difference. Whereas those of the Old are mainly composed of narratives of action, fable and imaginative fancy, those of the New Testament are rich in common and well-known experiences of life. It is true that Jesus uses imagination in certain parables, but in all His stories there is a ring of reality. They are free of the crudity which marks the Old Testament stories, and some of them are so intricately woven that they required to be interpreted for their hearers. The * time ’ difference in the two types of parable is also important. The New Testament Parables were spoken by Jesus Himself as their originator, and the period of narration was no more than three years. Those of the Old Testament were spoken by various people over a period of time embracing many generations and several civilizations, each with its peculiar language, mode of expression, morality and religious interpretation. The parables of the New Testament are universal in their appeal, whilst those of the Old Testament, with few exceptions, are local and personal; the truths of the former may be universalized, but the latter are mostly related to particular events and to directly personal duties, national and individual. The Old Testament Parables lack the prophetic note and high spiritual value of their successors, yet they charm us by their truth to life and their unerring portrayal of the deeper regions of human experience sin, remorse, punishment and reformation. In them we read of the moral and social life of varied epochs in Israel’s history and are given a glimpse of the religious conditions under different regimes. They are very matterof-fact because they shew us man as he was and is rather than as he may be ideally. Their humanity is their appeal. THE WORD * PARABLE ’ In his opening chapter of ’ Notes on the Parables ’ Archbishop Trench refers to the difficulty of finding a definition of the word ’ parable ’ which should “ omit none of its distinctive marks, and at the same time include nothing superfluous and merely accidental.”
What the distinguished scholar writes regarding a definition for New Testament Parables applies with even more force to the setting forth of an adequate and acceptable definition of Old Testament Parables. So familiar are we with the charming stones told by Jesus Christ and with their particular form and application that we may bring to the word ’ parable ’ in the Old Testament a misleading conception of its content. A simple and concise definition is not possible, but an explanation of what the word embraces can be provided. The Jews had many “ apophthegms, parables, pregnant witty sayings... and even apart from the Book of Proverbs it is doubtful whether any national literature is so rich in such utterances as is the Bible “ (McCurdy, History, Prophecy and the Monuments). Oral and written collections of sage and apt sayings, of fables and parables were common in Israel just as were ballads and proverbs in Britain many years ago. THE OLD TESTAMENT ’ MASHAL ’ As a rule, the English word ’ parable ’ in the Old Testament represents the Hebrew word ’ Mashal ’ (^9) though we may discover no ’ parable ’ such as that word usually implies in the English language. The Hebrew word is generally translated in our English versions as ’ parable ’ or ’ proverb,’ but it embraces a wide range of illustrative and figurative language.
Mashal may mean parable (Eze 17:2), proverb (1Sa 10:12), allegory (Eze 24:3), taunting-speech (Isa 14:4), an argument (Job xxvii. I and xxix. i) or an obscure utterance such as a poetic oracle (Num 23:7; Num 23:18, and Hab 2:6). “ Through the Mashal a man can understand the words of the Law “ (C. G. Montefiore, Rabbinic Literature, &c.). The purpose of the Mashal being primarily its suggestion of comparison or similitude, there is little difficulty in understanding how the word became associated with ’ parable,’ because in the ordinary acceptance of its meaning the word ’ parable ’ necessitates a comparison or similitude. A parable is defined by Bishop Lowth as “ a continued narrative of a fictitious event, applied by way of simile to the illustration of some important truth.” In the Old Testament the terms ’ parable ’ and ’ proverb ’ are almost interchangeable, and it is interesting to observe that the Old Testament stories which conform most closely to what is regarded as the customary standard of what constitutes a parable are not introduced by the term Mashal. These are the narratives of the Ewe Lamb (2Sa 12:1-4), the Tekoan Woman (2Sa 14:4 f.), the Lost Prisoner (1Ki 20:38-42), the Vineyard (Isa 5:1-7) and the Ploughman (Isa 28:23-29). They are, nevertheless, Mashals, and they suggest that we must seek our Old Testament Parables in the content rather than in the name of the stories.
NEW TESTAMENT PARABLES
There is not the same difficulty among terms in the New Testament, where all the accepted parables are contained within the four Gospels, being part of the teaching of Jesus Christ.
They are inseparable from their blessed Narrator, and are all related in greater or less degree to the Kingdom which He came to establish upon earth. Matthew states that “ all these things spake Jesus in parables unto the multitudes; and without a parable spake He nothing unto them: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things hidden from the foundation of the world.” It has been pointed out that Matthew’s quotation is rather free, and that it does not agree with the Hebrew or with the Septuagint of Psa 78:2 (Kirkpatrick, The Book of Psalms); but the fact remains that Jesus “ adopted the methods of the teachers of the old dispensation, and fulfilled them by carrying them to their highest perfection.”
Even in the New Testament, however, there is need to distinguish between parable and proverb and between parable and allegory. Some scholars would exclude John’s narratives from the list of parables on the ground that they are allegories; others would restrict the list of parables to about thirty rather than accept about sixty, which are recognised by many students of the Gospels. The interchangeability of ’ parable ’ and (proverb ’ is also found in the New Testament. Jesus remarked that His hearers would say to Him this * parable ’
“ Physician, heal thyself “ where the word parable ’ is inapplicable; whilst He also said, “ I have spoken unto you in proverbs,” where, it would seem, the word * parables ’ is implied. In a wider sense it may be claimed that in so far as most of the sentences of the Sermon on the Mount are metaphorical or similitudinary, they are also parabolical; but by common consent they are excluded from the list of parables because they do not provide the elementary foundation narratives by means of which a comparison is set up and a moral is derived.
Bishop Lowth’s definition of a parable falls short when applied to the narratives of Jesus Christ, since His Parables do not merely provide * some important truth,’ but they supply a definitely spiritual truth related to the Gospel message. In dealing with the Old Testament Parables we must confine our study to such stories as were probably regarded at the time of their narration as having an implied lesson of spiritual or moral truth or of practical and possibly personal allusion. We must avoid the temptation to read too much into them and to discover detailed circumstances to coincide with each minute part of the stories. Nor must they be so Christianized as to deprive them of their historical, local and individual importance, although we endeavour to see their message, if there be any, for our own period of history. For our purpose there must lie behind a Parable a particular truth, fact, act or picture which is necessary to the moral or spiritual life, or to a special expression of some characteristic which ought to be exemplified in the life of an individual, community or nation. The story may be given as fact, fable or fancy, but there lies within it, by comparison, another and higher meaning. This higher meaning is, in most instances, applicable to the listener’s life.
PARABLES OF FACT The narratives of fact may or may not deal with historical truth, but the circumstances depicted are such that they lend the possibility of truth to the stories, and by the application of that possible truth a contrast is set up which leads to the other meaning which constitutes a parable. Among such stones are the Ewe Lamb (2Sa 12:1-4), the Vineyard (Isa 5:1-7), and the Poor Wise Man (Ecc 9:14-15). In form the parables of fact are nearest to those of our Lord.
FABLE
It may be objected that the fable can never rise beyond mere human morality, that Jesus did not stoop to its use, and that it makes inanimate and earthly substances as well as beasts and birds appear as though in possession of human speech. If the fable succeeds in its purpose by bringing home an ethical or spiritual truth which would otherwise remain unrecognised or inadmissible, and if it does this by setting the story in the fable over and against the listener’s own life, then such a fable is parabolic. In this sense the fables of Jotham (Jdg 9:8-15) and Jehoash (2Ki 14:9) are admitted as Old Testament Parables. Archbishop Trench holds that the fable “ has no place in the Scripture, and in the nature of things could have none, for the purpose of Scripture excludes it.” He regards the fable as “ essentially of the earth, and never lifts itself above the earth.” He draws a very fine distinction between ’ folly ’ and ’ sin,’ and indicates that though the fables teach men their folly they do not teach them their sin. For the reasons already specified the fables are included as parables in this book and we might with some advantage urge the claim for these fables to be admitted as parables because of their narration in a much earlier civilization than the New Testament Parables.