Journal Spring 2010 Issue PDF

Journal of Biblical Ministry
Spring
2010
1

Spring, 2010
A journal to support and encourage those in ministry by providing studies
in biblical texts with application for practical ministry
CONTENTS
Introduction, Dr. James Flanagan ................................................................................ 2
Articles:
I Love A Mystery! Interpretive Guidelines for the Parables of Matthew 13
Dr. J. M. Kinnebrew ........................................................................................... 3
The Kingdom Parables of Matthew 13: Their Context and Function,
Dr. Brad Arnett ................................................................................................... 14
Why Jesus Taught with Parables, Dr. Benjamin Cocar ..................................... 24
The Purpose of the Parable of the Good Samaritan,
Rev. Hal M. Haller, Jr., ...................................................................................... 34
The Feel of Biblical Narrative Literature, Dr. Tony Guthrie .............................. 55
Lessons about Pastoral Care from the Parable of Luke 15,
Dr. Ronald E. Cobb ........................................................................................... 60
The Use of Parables in the Old Testament , Dr. H. David Phillips...................... 65
Parables and Pedagogy, Marcia Bost ................................................................ 74

Guest Author:
The Surety of the Resurrection of Christ and Those Who Are in Him,
Dr. Steven L. Cox .............................................................................................. 82


Spring
2010
2
INTRODUCTORY NOTE
By
James L. Flanagan, Ph.D.
President

Were delighted to present to you the second edition of Luther Rice Seminary and Uni-
versitys Journal for Biblical Ministries. This journal has been established by our faculty
with the intent of helping you fulfill the ministry God has given you in many different con-
texts.

The bulk of this edition is dedicated to a topic that thousands of Southern Baptist
churches will be studying this year: The Parables of Jesus. In addition to articles on
specific parables, you will find corollary articles regarding the use of story in the ministry
of teaching/preaching, the importance of feeling the biblical narrative, the real reason
Christ used parables, and the Old Testament background for such a use.

We are also happy to have an important article from guest writer, Dr. Stephen Cox. Dr.
Cox, formerly Assistant Professor of New Testament here at Luther Rice, is now on the
faculty of Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary in Memphis, TN. His article on the
resurrection of Christ is one that you will want to read and share with others.

It has been our joy to research and write what follows. I pray it will be a blessing to you.
The publishing of this journal is a new endeavor for Luther Rice, and we welcome your
comments and constructive criticism. Our mission is to help you become the best
leader and minister for Christ that you can possibly be. If you know of a way to make
this journal more effective to that end, please let us know.

Now turn the page, read, enjoy, learn, and teach others also (2 Tim 2.2)!

James L. Flanagan, Ph.D.
President, CEO
Luther Rice Seminary & University


Spring
2010
3
I Love A Mystery!
Interpretive Guidelines For
The Parables of Matthew 13

J. M. Kinnebrew, Ph.D.
Prof. of Theology
VP for Academic Affairs

Introduction
A rarely noticed phenomenon of Scripture is that the apostles of Christ never used story
telling as a method of instruction either in their epistles or in their recorded sermons.
This is all the more striking since parables comprise more than one-third of the re-
corded teachings of Jesus.
1

Of course, parables were not invented by Jesus. There are instances of them in the OT
as well as among the rabbinical, and even pagan, literatures
2
. However, no rabbi or
prophet ever used this teaching device as effectively as Jesus, even though (for rea-
sons noted below) He waited until sometime in the second year of His three-year teach-
ing career to adopt its use.

Because of their figurative nature, parables have afforded the interpreter with unlimited
opportunity for fanciful and erroneous pronouncements. This article addresses the in-
terpretation of the mystery parables of Matthew 13 (also found in Mark 4 and partially
in Luke 8).

To begin, the article makes note of the central place that the kingdom of God holds in
the teaching of Jesus. Second, mention is made of the various ways in which the Bible
speaks of the kingdom of God. Third, Jesus reference to the mysteries of the king-
dom is discussed in relation to how the interpreter should understand the parables of

1
Neil R. Lightfoot, Lessons from the Parables (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1965), 13.

2
2 Sam 12.1-13, though not called a parable (Heb. mashal), has every distinction of being one.
See also 2 Sam 14.5-l3; I Ki 20.39-42; Isa 5.1-7; 28.21-29; Ezek 17.1-24; 19.1-14; 20.45-49; and 24.3-14.
For extra-biblical examples, see R.C. Trench, Notes on the Parables of Our Lord (Grand Rapids, Baker,
1986), 21-26 and Rabbinic Parables, http://virtualreligion.net/iho/parable.html (accessed online
11.13.2009).

Spring
2010
4
A mystery, . . .
is some truth
that has been
hidden from
mankind in ages
past but is now

Matthew 13. Finally, some interpretive guidelines are deduced from the historical and
literary contexts of the parables.

The Kingdom Is the Key
According to Roy Zuck, all of Jesus parables refer in some way to the kingdom of
God.
3
That should come as no surprise. After all, Jesus ministry--like that of His fore-
runner--started with the proclamation that the kingdom of God had come (Mt 3.2; 4.17).
Jesus was born King of the Jews (Mt. 2.2)
4
, and after only a few years of ministry He
died King of the Jews (Mt. 27.37)the long anticipated kingdom apparently doomed
from the outset.

That was--and for many still is--a very troubling thing. As a matter of fact, one great
reason modern-day Jews give for rejecting the messianic claims of Jesus of Nazareth is
simply this: When Messiah comes the kingdom of God will come.
The kingdom of God has obviously not come (just look around),
so it is impossible for Messiah to have arrived.
5

Which Kingdom?
To understand this dilemma, we must first recognize that the
kingdom of God (usually called the kingdom of heaven by
Matthew)
6
is presented by the writers of Scripture in at least
two different senses:

1. Gods unrestricted, eternal reign over all creation (Ps
103.19; Dan 4.34-35; etc.)

3
Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation (Wheaton: Victor, 1991), 204.

4
All Scriptures are quoted from the New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982).

5
To the Christian, the Jew is the stubborn fellow who in a redeemed world is still waiting for the
Messiah. For the Jew the Christian is a heedless fellow who in an unredeemed world affirms that some-
how or other redemption has taken place. Martin Buber, quoted by Reinhold Niebuhr, Martin Buber:
1878-1965, Christianity and Crisis, July 12, 1965, 146.

6
Likely in deference to the regard he and his Jewish readers had to the unspeakable Name.
However, Matthew departs from his custom and refers to the kingdom of God five times (6.33; 12.28;
19.24; 21.31, 43), indicating that the two terms are interchangeable.

Spring
2010
5
2. Gods localized, temporal reign over all the earth from Jerusalem (2 Sam 7.12-
16; Ps 2.6; Is 2.3; 9.6; Lk 1.32-33; etc.)
7

When Jesus came announcing the kingdom of God was at hand, He most assuredly
meant the kingdom in the second sense noted above. There would be no reason to an-
nounce that the kingdom in its unrestricted and eternal aspects had come, for there was
never a time when the kingdom in that regard was not functioning or at hand. More-
over, the localized, political kingdom is what all His hearers were expecting and would
have understood Him to be proclaiming. If he had meant something else, He certainly
would have told them. He never did.

It is certain that Jesus followers believed He had come to establish the localized, tem-
poral kingdom of God on earth. After all, their Master had taught them to pray for that
phase of the kingdom, they often jockeyed with one another to gain the best position in
it, and even after the resurrection they anticipated its restoration to Israel (Mt 6.10; Lk
22.24; Acts 1.6).

Nor was their expectation uninformed, as is sometimes supposed. The wrong-
headedness of such a supposition is seen in the fact that Jesus dubbed his newly in-
structed disciples (undoubtedly with a generosity most seminary students would wish
from their professors) scribe[s] instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven (Mt
13.52). Why then, given Jesus favorable characterization, would commentators many
centuries removed from the occasion charge the disciples with a carnal prejudice in fa-
vor of erroneous opinions?
8

It seems that the disciples critics have never noticed that when they asked their much
maligned question, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? they had just
undergone forty days of personal training from Jesus in things pertaining to the king-
dom of God (Acts 1.3, 6). Would they have emerged from such a seminar with con-
cepts wildly at variance with what the Master Teacher had been teaching them for a
month and ten days? It is worth noting that Jesus did not rebuke or correct them, but
answered their question with the needed reminder that kingdom scheduling was His

7
See Lehman Strauss, Prophetic Mysteries Revealed (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Bros., 1980), 18.
Cf. the five aspects of the kingdom discussed by James M. Gray, Synthetic Bible Studies, Revised and
Enlarged edition (NY: Fleming H. Revell, 1923), 196-97 for a more precise and specific delineation.

8
Albert Barnes, Barnes Notes on the Old and New Testaments, edited by Robert F. Frew (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1949), 19:4.

Spring
2010
6
business; bringing the Good News to the entire world would be enough to keep them
and their descendants busy until the end (Acts 1.7-8)!

The Rejection of the King
So, when Jesus began teaching about the kingdom, it was the visible, earthly reign of
God that He was offering the nation Israel. As this offer was continually extended and
repeatedly rejected, however (see Dr. Arnetts article), it became apparent that if the
kingdom were to be experienced on earth at this time it would have to take another
form.

The earthly kingdom without the King on earth was impossible, and the rejection of the
King by His earthly people was impending. This is why Jesus began to teach in par-
ables (cf. Dr. Cocars article). In doing so, those who had ears to hear could be in-
structed in a third, and hitherto unrevealed, aspect of the kingdom: the kingdom in its
mystery form. As Christ Himself explained, It has been given to you to know the
mysteries of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 13.11).

The Meaning of the Mystery

A mystery, in NT parlance, is not an enigma or insoluble problem. Rather, it is some
truth that has been hidden from mankind in ages past but is now unveiled by NT revela-
tion. This is clearly Pauls understanding in Eph 3.3-5, where he says, By revelation
He made known to me the mystery . . . which in other ages was not made known to the
sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and proph-
ets.
9

When Jesus referred to the mysteries of the kingdom that were being revealed to His
disciples, He was telling them that they were hearing for the first timeand before any-
one elsesome new things about the kingdom of God. Things unknown even to the
OT prophets who wrote so extensively about the coming reign of God.

Jesus beatitude makes this plain, Blessed are your eyes . . . and your ears . . . for
many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and
to hear what you hear, and did not hear it (Mt 13.16.17). Nor was this blessing lost to
the disciples. One of them wrote later in terms that show how all NT believers are

9
Many NT doctrines are designated mysteries in this sense (e.g., Rom 11.25; 1 Cor 15.51; Eph
3.6; 5.32; 6.19; Col 1.26-27; 2 Thes 2.7; 1 Tim 3.9, 16).

Spring
2010
7
blessed with a knowledge that extends beyond that obtained by the likes of David,
Isaiah, Jeremiah, and even the holy angels (1 Pet 1.10-12)!

Peter asserts that those OT scribes who wrote of the sufferings of Christ and the glo-
ries that would follow (1 Pet 1.11) could not comprehend the rejection and the reign of
Christ. Understandably, the two events seemed mutually exclusive. Nor did they fore-
see the changing form of the kingdom that would come as a response to Christs rejec-
tion and as a prelude to His reign. This change was, as Jesus said, a mystery, a hid-
den truth only now revealed.

A striking indication that Jesus parables were meant to reveal such a change in the
kingdom program is the verb that He used to introduce the second parable in Matthew
13. Literally rendered, verse 24 would read, The kingdom of heaven has become like
[Grk. homoiothe--aorist, passive, indicative, 3
rd
pers., sing.]. The other parables (ex-
cept for the first, which has no introduction) are introduced with the simple adjective
homoia and are properly rendered the kingdom of heaven is like." This change off vo-
cabulary makes sense. Once Christ has told them that the kingdom has already been
made to become like something hitherto unexpected (because hitherto unre-
vealed),
10
He can understandably say the kingdom, from that point on, is like what-
ever follows.

Another indication that there was something new afoot is found in the final parable (Mt
13.51-53). After having been assured by the disciples that they understood all these
things, Jesus compares them to a householder who brings to his family things new
[the just conveyed mysteries] and old [the still relevant OT teachings]. In this way, Je-
sus communicates to these scribes that they are now disciples of the kingdom and
that they have been entrusted with a stewardship not previously given to any others.

One final point should be made regarding the proposed mystery form of the kingdom,
and that has to do with its chronology. Charles Ryrie, noting the previously mentioned

10
The concepts of a postponed kingdom, a change in the program, a possibility of Israels accept-
ing Christ during His first advent, etc. raise questions regarding omniscience, salvation, sovereignty, etc.
that are beyond the scope of this article. Suffice it to say that the terms used herein are anthropomorphic
and are not meant to imply that God was ever surprised or had to change His mind about anything. On
the other hand, Christs offer of the kingdom was valid and Israels rejection of Christ was wholly hers
(she could have done otherwise). Had she received Christ, the cross would have still happened, but
without the murderous intrigue and guilt (cf. Abrahams intended sacrifice of Isaac as a suggested model
of what might have happened). Further, praying people should not be offended by the thought that God
responds to the actions, good or bad, of man. The whole history of salvation is a record of Gods re-
sponse to man.

Spring
2010
8
rendering of verse 24the kingdom of heaven has become like, concluded that the
kingdom of heaven was assuming the form described in the parables at that time when
Christ was personally ministering on the earth.
11
This, then, marks the beginning of the
mystery form of the kingdomit started prior to the crucifixion of Christ; but what marks
its end? Again, Ryrie speaks, The end of the time period covered by these parables is
indicated by the phrase end of the world or more literally consummation of the age
(verses 39-49). This is the Second Advent of Christ when He shall come in power and
great glory.
12

How Then Will You Understand All the Parables?
13

Assuming the validity of what has been said above, what do the mysteries of the king-
dom expressed in the parables of Matthew 13 reveal about the current and coming
kingdom of God? A verse-by-verse commentary on the eight parables is far beyond the
scope of this article, but a brief delineation of interpretive guidelines may be helpful. As
one seeks to understand these parables, the following observations are suggestive of a
proper path:

1. Jesus Provided a ParadigmIn Marks account, when the disciples expressed
their need for an interpretation of the parable of the soils, Jesus asked, Do you
not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables? He
then immediately provided the interpretation to the first of His parables (Mk 4.13-
20). This suggests that the parable of the soils was set forth as a key to the
other stories in the series. So Jesus, in interpreting the first parable, offers a
template that can be applied to the interpretation of the others. What does that
template reveal?

Since Jesus gives meaning to several different components of the parable
(the seed, the birds, the four different soils, the scorching sun, etc.), we
should not be surprised to find more than one symbolic component in the
parables that follow. Nor should we be embarrassed to follow Jesus lead
in our own interpretations.

11
Charles Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillennial Faith (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953),
94-95.

12
Ibid. For an alternate view that sees all of these parables referring only to the future millennial
reign, see Ronald N. Glass, The Parables of the Kingdom: A Paradigm for Consistent Dispensationalism
in Michael Bauman and David Hall, eds. Evangelical Hermeneutics (Camp Hill, PA: Christian Publica-
tions, 1995), 147-89.

13
Mark 4.13.

Spring
2010
9
Since Jesus singled out for meaning certain emblems in the first parable
that He knew He would use in the others (e.g., the birds who pluck seed
from the wayside and the birds who gather in the mustard tree), it is rea-
sonable to impute to those symbols the meaning previously assigned if no
other meaning is given in the text. This is especially the case if, as as-
serted above, Jesus intended for His interpretation of the one parable to
provide a key to the others.

From the previous observation, it is a smallif not as certainstep to as-
sume that symbols for which the meaning was already well known, either
from OT usage or from the Masters other conversations with His disci-
ples, would have been understood to have the same well known sense in
these parables unless that sense was disavowed by Jesus (e.g., symbols
like the leaven, the treasure, etc.)

2. Jesus Defined the ParametersAs mentioned above, the time covered by
these parables extends from the days that the national leaders sealed their fate
with a final rejection of Jesus Messiahship until the time of His Second Coming
at the end of the age (13.24, 39). During this time period the kingdom of
heaven has become like what Jesus described in His parables (13.24).

This time period includes the church age (from Pentecost to the Rapture),
but it is not identical to that age, for it began prior to the crucifixion and will
not end until after the tribulation.

Thus these parables do not primarily concern the nature, function, and in-
fluence of the church. Rather, they show the hitherto unrevealed form in
which Gods theocratic rule would be exerted in a previously unrevealed
age necessitated by Israels rejection of Christ.
14

3. Jesus Affirmed a DivisionIn Matthews account (see also Mk 4.33-34), Jesus
spoke first to the multitude of people, sharing with them the parable of the
soils (vss. 3-9),
15
the parable of the tares (vss. 24-30), the parable of the mustard
seed (vss. 31-32), and the parable of the leaven (vss. 33-34). After that, He
sent the multitude away (vs. 36) and spoke to His disciples a private interpre-
tation of the parable of the tares (vss. 36-43), the parable of the hidden treasure
(vs. 44), the parable of the pearl of great price (vss. 45-46), the parable of the
dragnet (vss. 47-50), and the parable of the householder (vss. 51-53).

14
J. Dwight Pentecost, The Words and Works of Jesus Christ: A Study of the Life of Christ
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 214.

15
Apparently sharing the interpretation only with His disciples (vss. 10-23).


Spring
2010
10
This division of His audience may indicate a division of the parables
into two groupsfour spoken to all (some of whom had ears to hear
and some who didnt
16
) and four spoken to the disciples, who having
heard the parables and their interpretation, became scribe[s] in-
structed concerning the kingdom of heaven (vs. 52a).

This division of the parables into two categories is further signified
when Jesus speaks of the parables teachings as things new and
old that the disciples would bring forth in their future mission (vs.
52b).

4. Jesus Affirmed a UnityWhen He had finished sharing these parables with His
disciples, Jesus asked them if they had understood all these things. (13.51).
Only when they answered Yes did He consider them instructed concerning the
kingdom of heaven.

If one is to understand the meaning of any of these parables, he must
understand all of the parables.

None of the parables should be considered as stand alone creations.
Rather, they are each an important piece of a grand mosaic.

The interpretation of one parable must harmonize with all the other
parables. If the interpretation of one parable contradicts the interpreta-
tion of another parable, one or the other interpretation (or both) is
wrong.

5. Matthew Provided a ContextAs described above, these parables were spo-
ken in the context of Jesus kingdom offer to Israel. The kingdom and kingship of
Jesus is the major theme of the Gospel of Matthew. That
Gospel presents its readers with:

The Confirming Genealogy of the King (1.1-17)
The Coming and Recognition of the King (2.1-3.12)
o By the Magi
o By the Messenger
The Confirmation of the King (3.13-4.11)
o Through His Baptism in Jordans Waters

16
A double advantage of this form of teaching among those not inclined to hear is that it is cryp-
tic enough to relieve them of the accountability required for rejecting clearly revealed truth and yet memo-
rable enough to be retained and continue its convicting work with the hope that they should later want to
hear and be saved. Every time they passed a field, a sower, or a mustard plant, they would be reminded
of that rabbis strange story and perhaps begin to wonder what it really meant.

Spring
2010
11
How can the
kingdom pro-
ceed if the nation
to whom it was
promised rejects
the King?
o Through His Battle in the Judean Wilderness
The Constitution of the Kingdom (5-7)
The Conquests of the King (8)
o Over Disease
o Over Disturbances
o Over Demons
The Controversies over the King (9)
o Over Claiming to Forgive Sins
o Over Eating with Sinners
o Over Failing to Fast
The Commissioning of the Kings Heralds (10)
The Conflicts of the King with Israel (11-12)
o They Rejected His Messenger (11.2-19)
o They Rejected His Miracles (11.20-24)
o They Rejected His Mercy (12.1-13)
o They Rejected His Messianic Credentials
(12.14-45)

It is at this point in Matthews presentation (and at this
point in real timeas verse one says, on the same
day) that the parables are given.

Perhaps in a move that was as parabolic as His
words, Jesus went out of the house and sat in a
boat to address the crowd from a position that
symbolized the mutual rejection of National Israel and her
Christ (13.1-2)her rejection of Him and His consequent (though temporary) re-
jection of her.
17

This context helps the reader to know that the parables were spoken to meet a
particular historic need. That need was to answer the question that was most
certainly in the disciples minds that very day: How can the kingdom proceed if
the nation to whom it was promised rejects the King? Any interpretation of these
parables must provide an answer to this most important question. If the interpre-

17
Other indications that Jesus had finally set aside any hope of the nation at large receiving the
kingdom are seen in: (1) His condemnation of the large cities and His invitation to any individual who
would still come and learn of me(11.28-30); (2) His warning to the leaders regarding their blasphemy of
the Spirit (12.31-37); (3) His refusal to work any more miraculous signs for the leaders (12.38-45); and (4)
His disavowal of fleshly relations but confirmation of kinship to whoever does the will of My Father
(12.46-50).

Spring
2010
12
tation would not have met the need of the first-century hearers, it is suspect for
twenty-first century readers.

6. Jesus Said There Are New Things HereIf ones interpretation of the parables
provides only moral truisms (like good will always win out) or things already re-
vealed in the OT revelation (like one day the kingdom of God will take over the
whole world), then that interpretation has missed the mark, for Jesus spoke of
mysteries.

As a collection of mysteries, there are things here that could not have
been discovered through mere observation

As a collection of mysteries, there are even things here that cannot
be found in the divinely inspired revelation of the OT

Surveying ones interpretation of the whole series of parables, the
question must be asked (and answered in the affirmative), Is there
anything here that, until that very day when Jesus spoke, had been
kept secret from the foundation of the world (13.35)?

7. Jesus Said There Are Old Things Here TooIf ones interpretation of these
parables somehow does away with the kingdom promises of the OT and the lit-
eral earthly reign of Messiah, it misses the mark as well. Jesus is still destined to
sit on the throne of His ancestor David and reign over the house of Jacob forever
(Lk 1.32-33).

Based as it is on an unconditional covenant of God, the kingdom on
earth cannot be forever set aside because of one generations unbe-
lief. The Greater than Solomon will reign from Davids throne.

The things old predicted by the prophets of Israel should still be
brought forth as truth when a scribe instructed concerning the king-
dom of heaven comes to the table to feed his people. To dish out the
new and leave the old in the storehouse is to neglect ones steward-
ship and rule over a malnourished house.

CONCLUSION
No man ever spoke like this man, said the officers who were sent to arrest Jesus
(John 7.46). Indeed it was true. The One called the Logos was a Master of the spoken
word. No politician, Jesus spoke plainly and with a sometimes painful honesty. When

Spring
2010
13
He announced the coming of His kingdom, He made it very clear that repentant hearts
were required of all who would be its subjects.
This was not a welcome message among people who were externally religious but in-
ternally depraved. Their resistance to the King became more and more apparent, culmi-
nating at last in a blasphemous denial of the miracle-working Spirits conviction. Having
insulted the Spirit of Grace (Heb 10.29), the leaders of the nation tragically forfeited
the kingdom for their entire generation.

This episode in Israels history is a reminder of the awful responsibility borne by a na-
tions leaders. Those who rule in opposition to the righteousness of God will most cer-
tainly be judged, and the nation ruled by such will inevitably suffer.

But individual citizens have a responsibility of their own, and God still allows them to
choose to follow Him. Despite the official opposition of Israel, the offer of the kingdom
was not completely withdrawn. Instead, the kingdom would now appear in a mystery
form not previously revealed. The parables of Matthew 13 are dedicated to a descrip-
tion of that mystery form of the kingdom. Led by the example of Jesus and contextual
clues in the inspired record, contemporary interpreters have all they need to discover
the truths behind the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven (13.11).
May this writer and the reader delve into these important stories, heeding the admoni-
tion of Jesus (13.9): He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

Spring
2010
14
The Kingdom Parables of Matthew 13:
Their Context and Function

Brad Arnett, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of New Testament
Chair of the Department of Biblical Studies

INTRODUCTION

Critical to the interpretation of any biblical passage is its context. The Kingdom Parables
of Matthew 13 are no exception.
1
While a reader cannot know for certain the historical
occasion of the giving of these parables, one can observe how Matthew incorporated
them into his gospel and conclude that his placement of the parables in the story line of
the gospel was important to him and most likely was reflective of the historical situation.
This paper will attempt to highlight the context of the parables of Matthew 13 in an effort
to better understand their function in the story. The methodology employed here is nar-
rative criticism, though not a strict application of it. Attention is given to plot development
and the interactions between characters as features leading up to the giving of the par-
ables of Matthew 13.

An interesting question of Matthew 13 is that asked by Jesus disciples, Why do you
speak to them in parables? (Mt 13:10).
2
Jesus answer indicates the reason, purpose,
and function of the parables.
3
The disciples were privy to the mysteries of the kingdom
but the general populace was not, and he drew a strong contrast between the two
groups (13:11-17).

On first blush, Jesus seems harsh to the modern reader. Where is the meek and lowly
Jesus? Does Jesus not want everyone to have access to the truths of the kingdom?
Why would he conceal any information from anyone?

1
These are commonly called Kingdom Parables because they teach truths about the Kingdom of
God. The discourse in Matthew is also known as the Parabolic Discourse.

2
Unless otherwise noted, The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible
Society, 2001) will be used in this paper.

3
See the related article by Dr. Cocar in this issue.

Spring
2010
15
The themes of indeci-
sion and opposition
flow like two inde-
pendent streams . . .
crashing into a
watershed moment in
chapter thirteen.
Perhaps one would do well to consider the context closely. In this case, the context is
primarily the materialseveral chapters worthpreceding this unit. Matthew, after all, is
a story, and unless the reader has in mind what has been occurring up to this point in
the story, he or she may very well misunderstand the message. The overarching and
driving question of this study is similar to the question the disciples posed. What was
the function of the parables of Matthew 13 in light of Matthews plot? To answer this
question, one must determine the context of the occasion.

The Setting of the Kingdom Parables

Three features of the story leading up to the giving of the parables in Matthew 13 are
important for determining the function of the parables. Moving
the plot forward are three main characters; they are
Jesus, the authorities (functioning as a single
character), and the crowds (also functioning as a
single character).
4
Other characters, such as John
the Baptist and Jesus disciples, also appear and
support the plot development, but Matthew gives
more attention to Jesus, the authorities, and the
crowds in chapters eleven and twelve.

The two groupsthe authorities and the crowdseach
have primary functions. The authorities oppose Jesus; they
seek opportunities to shame Him and, in 12:14, begin to seek to destroy Him. The care-
ful reader recognizes their increasing opposition against Jesus. The other groupthe
crowdsform a very important but often overlooked feature: indecision. The persistent
indecision of the crowds serves as the backdrop for the events in the text. That theme of
indecision which is the main feature of Matthew 11 will be treated first, and then the
theme of the opposition of the authorities, which is the main feature of Matthew 12, will
be explored. Finally, the paper will address the responses of Jesus to both groups
throughout Matthew 11-13. The themes of indecision and opposition flow like two inde-
pendent streams in chapters eleven and twelve, merging in the latter part of chapter
twelve and crashing into a watershed moment in chapter thirteen.

4
The authorities include scribes and Pharisees (9:3, 11; 12:14, 38). Matthew seems to use
crowds to include all of the people who are witnessing these events (9:8, 33, 36; 11:7; 13:2, 34). For
more on characters and plot in Gospel studies, see David Rhoads, Mark as Story, 2d ed. (Minneapolis:
Augsburg Fortress, 1999) and Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, In the Company of Jesus: Characters in
Marks Gospel (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 2000).


Spring
2010
16
Indecision of the Crowds

Jesus encounters multiple significant questions about his identity and movement
throughout chapter 11.
5
Matthew shows his readers that many questions surrounded
the ministry of Jesus. The chapter begins with John the Baptist asking the question,
Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another? (11:2). Johns question
should be seen as an indicator of the circulating questions about Jesus. Notice the first
person plural we in the question. John represents not only himself, but his disciples,
and Israel as a whole. The people are wondering who this Jesus is.

Instead of answering John with an outright, Yes, I am the one, Jesus answers with a
series of indicators that He is indeed the one. The response calls for a decision based
not on a statement but on demonstrable proofs.
6
At the end of his list, Jesus adds a
foreshadowing phrase, And blessed is the one who is not offended by me (11:6). Of-
fenses and opposition are commencing in the story line.

After His interchange with John the Baptist, Jesus asks the crowd a series of questions
about John. They are rhetorical questions, meant to elicit a commitment instead of a
mere answer. Jesus voices publicly the very questions the crowds were asking pri-
vately. The crowds were indecisive about John, too. This message to the crowds serves
as an integral part and sets the topic of discussion for the rest of the chapter and punc-
tuates the theme of indecision that extends to the giving of the parables in chapter thir-
teen. Chapter eleven is about the questions circulating about Jesus and his following.
Jesus begins to force the crowd to make a decision about Him. In this instance, the
push for a decision took the form of querying the crowds on the identity of John the Bap-
tist.

What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the
wind? What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft cloth-
ing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings houses. What

5
The questioning starts well before this point in the narrative. In 8:27, His disciples ask, What
kind of a man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey Him? In 9:14, Johns disciples ask, Why do
we and the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast? In chapter 11 the questions seem to become
more dominant in the narrative.

6
The demonstrable proof of Jesus Messianic status becomes heightened in chapter twelve and
forms a key component to the thesis of this paper.


Spring
2010
17
then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than
a prophet (Mt. 11:7-9).

After Jesus questions the crowd on the identity of John the Baptist and proclaims that
he was truly the Elijah figure, He gave an interesting and difficult illustration of His gen-
eration.

Jesus compares the people of his day to children sitting in a public market, calling out,
7

We played the flute for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not
mourn (11:17). The image is not entirely clear to modern readers, and commentators
cannot agree on the referents of the image.
8
Yet the main point, either way, is that Je-
sus and John do not satisfy their generations expectations (11:18-19). In context Jesus
and John could be either the ones piping and singing or the ones who neither dance nor
mourn. The main idea remains; this generation cannot be satisfied. Jesus and John do
not do what the people want. They follow their own agenda and get criticized for it.

Some, presumably the authorities, say that John has a demon and Jesus is a drunkard.
Such dishonoring comments are circulating among the people, and Jesus addresses
them here. He points out the irony that they are inconsistent in their assessments, and
yet, they are consistent in their dissatisfaction and rejection of both Jesus and His fore-
runner. At risk here are the crowds who have not yet made such conclusions. For them,
the verdict is still out on Jesus and John. By identifying and publicly denouncing the un-
justified conclusions that some in this generation made, Jesus leads the crowds in
making the right conclusions. The undecided are being moved toward a decision.

7
Here the ESV and other translations (KJV, NKJV) provide an interpretation. A more literal trans-
lation allows for the children to be calling out to each other but does not demand it: . . . and calling out to
others (so NIV, TNIV; Greek, ). The others could be anyone, not necessarily children. NASB
has who call out to the other children, which is also interpretive (emphasis original, which means at least
the reader can tell children is not the underlying word).

8
The text does not make clear the antecedent of the first person plural subject of 11:17. Is it Je-
sus and John who are piping the flute and singing? Or is it the children in the marketplace who are piping
and singing? Furthermore, the performers audiences are not clear. Who does not dance to the piping?
Who does not mourn at the dirge? Some commentators see the pipers and singers as Jesus and John to
an unresponsive generation (e.g., Craig Blomberg, Matthew, New American Commentary [Nashville:
Broadman and Holman, 1992], 189-90). Others see this generation as the pipers and singers to an un-
responsive Jesus and John (e.g., Craig Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew [Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1999], 218). This latter view seems best.


Spring
2010
18
Jesus recognizes
and prepares for
the building op-
position.
The indecision of the crowds is highlighted in the next unit where Jesus denounced the
cities of Galilee, Chorazin, and Bethsaida. Interestingly, Jesus did not condemn the cit-
ies for opposing him, but for their lack of repentance at the demonstration of his works
of power (11:20-21). The rebuke gives way to a call for decision (11:25-30), which will
be treated later. Indecision in light of Jesus miracles is a decision against repentance.
9

The indecision of the crowds comes to a climactic point in 12:23 with a question. And
all the people were amazed, and said, Can this be the Son of David? This question
occurs in response to Jesus healing of a man who was demon-possessed, blind, and
mute. The authorities do not approve of the crowds speculating such things and initiate
a strong reaction. Now that the thematic backdrop to the interchanges in chapters 11-13
has been established, the authorities opposition to Jesus may be treated.

Increasing Opposition from the Authorities

If chapter eleven is about indecision, chapter twelve is certainly about opposition.
Against the backdrop of the crowds indecision are the stark contrast with the authori-
ties improper conclusions about Jesus and their drive to have him shamed and de-
stroyed (12:2, 14). To be sure, precursors of this opposition begin early in
chapter nine and build through chapters nine and ten.

A comparison of Matthew 9 and Matthew 12 is fascinating, as
some of the same phraseology occurs in both chapters. For ex-
ample, Jesus is accused of blasphemy in 9:3. Later, in 12:31-32,
Jesus warns the crowds, and especially the Pharisees, of the blas-
phemy against the Holy Spirit. Jesus knows their thoughts in both 9:4
and 12:25. In 9:27, two blind men address Jesus as the Son of David, and in
12:23 the crowds wonder if Jesus is the Son of David. And in both chapters the Phari-
sees say, He casts out demons by the prince of demons (9:34) and It is only by Beel-
zebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons (12:24). Both accusations
follow the healing of a demon-possessed man who was mute (9:32-33; 12:22-24, the
second man was also blind). These remarkable similarities tie the two chapters together
and reinforce the theme of opposition that develops in chapters nine through twelve.

Jesus recognizes and prepares for the building opposition in His instructions to the
twelve disciples as they are about to be sent on their first mission (10:1-42). Several key

9
Opportunity and privilege bring responsibility. John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, New In-
ternational Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 467.

Spring
2010
19
verses point to His expectation of rejection and persecution. For example, Jesus says to
them, Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves (10:16); You will
be hated by all for my names sake (10:22); and I did not come to bring peace, but a
sword (10:34). Another verse connects uniquely with chapter nine and twelve because
of the reference to Beelzebul: If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul,
how much more will they malign those of his household (10:25).

Matthew 11 does not highlight the opposition theme, but the opposition reappears with a
vengeance in Matthew 12 as Jesus comes under scrutiny for his Sabbath observance,
or non-observance as it may be. In 12:1-8, the Pharisees challenge Jesus for allowing
His disciples to pick and eat grain on the Sabbath. Jesus responds by defending His
disciples with three references to the Old Testament. His first citation is from an occa-
sion in the life of David when David and his men were hungry and ate the consecrated
temple bread meant for the priests alone (1 Sm 21:1-6). Next, Jesus cites the Law that
specifies the priests are to work on the Sabbath (e.g., Nm 28:9-10). Finally, Jesus cites
the prophet Hosea: I desire mercy, not sacrifice (6:6). So, in His defense, and in de-
fense of His disciples, Jesus referenced applicable Old Testament accounts of a king, a
priest, and a prophet. His answer to the authorities illustrated His personal prerogative
to abrogate the Sabbath restrictions, especially in special circumstances: For the Son
of Man is lord of the Sabbath (12:8).
10

Jesus next enters a synagogue where a man with a withered hand is present (12:9-21).
Seeking a way to accuse Jesus, they query Him about healing on the Sabbath. The
nearest antecedent to they is the Pharisees of the previous unit. Jesus responds by
comparing the value of a man to a sheep, since His accusers would naturally help a
sheep on the Sabbath. He points out the glaring weakness of their interpretation of the
Sabbath laws. They value animals (especially their own) more than they value people.
Such a valuation is improper. What happens as a result of the interchange? Jesus does
good on the Sabbath and restores the mans hand; the Pharisees go out and conspire
to have a man (Jesus) destroyed. Whos behaving lawfully?

The next instance of the increasing opposition occurs in 12:22-24. Jesus heals a de-
mon-possessed man who is blind and mute. When the Pharisees hear that the people
(literally, the crowds) are wondering if Jesus is the Son of David, they charge Jesus
with casting out demons by the prince of demons, Beelzebul. This is an accusation re-
peated from a previous instance (9:34). A major difference here is that Jesus responds.

10
. . . the debate comes down finally to the person of Jesus. Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13,
Word Biblical Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1993), 334.

Spring
2010
20
Jesus Responses to the Increasing Opposition
And the Remaining Indecision

The three main character-groups in this section of Matthews GospelJesus, the
crowds, and the authoritiesare moving swiftly toward a major confrontation. Jesus is
performing ministries of teaching and healing and calling the people to repentance. The
crowds are indecisive, delaying their response to Jesus call. The authorities have made
their decision to reject Jesus and are seeking to influence the crowds to do likewise. For
His part, Jesus has been responding to the two groups throughout chapters eleven and
twelve. As the opposition increases and the indecision persists, Jesus begins to re-
spond on a different level.

Worthy of note is that Jesus responses throughout Matthew 11-12 follow a dual pur-
pose. Often the response is rebuke, yet sometimes the response is one of invitation. For
example, the crowds are undecided on John the Baptist, so Jesus invites them to ac-
cept that John is the expected Elijah-figure (11:14). He issues the statement, which
functions as an invitation listen and learn, to become a disciple, He who has ears to
hear, let him hear (11:15). The call to hear appears again in Matthew 13:9, 15, 16, and
43. The repetition indicates its importance and ties it to the previous occurrences.

Following Jesus strong rebuke of the cities where His miracles were done (11:20-24),
He offers one of the most celebrated invitations ever given, Come to Me, all who are
weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest (11:28). Matthew intersperses through-
out the two chapters are the crowds indecision, the authorities opposition, and Jesus
rebukes and invitations.
11

In 12:25-37 the two mounting themes of indecision and opposition intersect. And at the
intersection is where Jesus strongest rebuke in this section occurs. The crowds are un-
decided and when the authorities hear that the crowds wonder if Jesus is the Messiah
(Son of David), they react vehemently, attributing His work to Beezebul. Jesus issues a
response, to the crowds as well as the Pharisees, that shows the incongruence of their
conclusions. Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste (12:25). Then He warns
the authorities that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is an unforgiveable sin (12:31-32).
The implication is that they have either committed this sin or have come extremely close
to doing so.

11
John MacArthur, Matthew 8-15, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody
Press, 1987), 237-38.

Spring
2010
21
Jesus and His
disciples are on a
mission to gather
the lost sheep of
the house of Is-
rael
The warning about the unforgiveable sin is based on the principle given in 12:30: Who-
ever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. Je-
sus is gathering; the Pharisees are scattering. In the context of the crowds indecision,
this becomes very clear. Jesus is calling the crowds to decide about Him (gathering)
while the authorities are seeking to influence the crowds to reject Jesus by dishonoring
Him and His works (scattering). A flashback to Matthew 9:34-36 is enlightening:

But the Pharisees said, He casts out demons by the prince of
demons. And Jesus went throughout all the cities and villages,
teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the
gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease
and every affliction. When he saw the crowds,
he had compassion for them, because they
were harassed and helpless, like sheep
without a shepherd [scattered] (emphasis
added).

Jesus and His disciples are on a mission to gather the
lost sheep of the house of Israel (10:6), but the authorities
are resisting their efforts and providing obstacles in the way of the
crowds coming to Jesus. Jesus will not continue to allow it. He rebukes them and dis-
honors them publicly, calling them a brood of vipers and warning them of the judgment
to come (12:33-37).

Even after the strong rebuke, the scribes and Pharisees approach Jesus again, this
time asking for a sign. In His refusal, Jesus calls them an evil and adulterous generation
and says only one sign will be given to themthe sign of Jonah, which parallels and
points to Jesus death, burial, and resurrection. Then, yet again, Jesus calls for repen-
tance. He rallies in his support two allusions to gentiles who valued the word of God.
The men of Ninevah and the queen of the South will condemn Jesus generation be-
cause they would not listen to the something greater than Jonah and Solomon. A
twice-repeated refrain, something greater than . . . is here (12:41, 42), punctuates the
section. The first refrain compares Jesus to a king (Solomon), the second Jesus to a
prophet (Jonah).

The unit immediately preceding the Kingdom Parables of Matthew 13 depicts a dis-
avowal of sorts by Jesus of His mother and brothers. Matthew mentions only that they
wished to speak to Him; the parallel in Mark indicates that they were attempting to help

Spring
2010
22
Him because some thought He was acting irrationally (Mk 3:21, 31-35). Jesus re-
sponse is to ask Who is my mother, and who are my brothers? and to indicate that His
disciples are His family because His family is demarcated by those who do the will of
the Father (Mt 12:46-50). Such a statement serves to call the crowds to obey the Fa-
ther by becoming Jesus disciples.
12

At the conclusion of chapter twelve, the call for decision is again thrust upon them, and
in chapter thirteen Jesus takes a step that makes it difficult for the authorities to resist
Him and hard for the crowds to remain indecisive.

That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat beside the sea.
And great crowds gathered about him, so that he got into a boat and
sat down. And the whole crowd stood on the beach. And he told them
many things in parables . . . (Mt 13:1-3).

In light of the material preceding Matthew 13, the Kingdom Parables constitute the cli-
max of Jesus response to the opposition and indecision He has faced thus far in the
narrative. He resorts to ambiguity of teaching as a way to elicit a response from the
crowds and to shield His message from those who oppose Him.

The disciples question of 13:10 (Why do you speak to them in parables?) does not
mean that Jesus created a new form of teaching that was uncommon in His day. Quite
the contrary, many teachers used parabolic illustrations to help their listeners appre-
hend their message. Jesus was not the innovator of parabolic teaching. What is unique
about Jesus use of parables in Matthew 13 is that He did not explain them.
13
Parables
usually are utilized by teachers to clarify their teachings. Jesus used them in such a
manner previously (e.g., Mt. 5:13-16; 6:26-30; 7:24-27). The difference in Matthew 13 is
the lack of the main teaching of which the parable was only an illustration. In the King-
dom Parables, He gives the parable publicly but explains it only privately:

12
Michael J. Wilkins, Matthew, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2004), 472.

13
Jesus was not alone in the use of parables. Jewish teachers often used them, but as a rule
they place parable and interpretation side by side. But Jesus did not provide the explanation along with
the parable; instead he demanded of his hearers that they discern the truth of what he was saying, and
that they respond accordingly. Barclay M. Newman and Philip C. Stine, A Handbook on the Gospel of
Matthew, UBS Helps for Translators; UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1992),
401.


Spring
2010
23
The effect of the am-
biguous parables is
to force a decision
about Jesusone
must either become
His disciple or turn
away.
And he answered them, To you it has been given to
know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to
them it has not been given. For to the one who has,
more will be given, and he will have an abundance,
but from the one who has not, even what he has
will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in
parables, because seeing they do not see, and
hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand
(Mt. 13:11-13).

Jesus does not cease public teachingthat would be a win for
the authorities and a loss for the crowds. Nor does He continue the
public teaching of truths that will continue only to satisfy the crowds curiosity and elicit
the authorities ire. No one wins in that scenario either.

Instead, Jesus uses the public teaching of ambiguous parables to draw out the would-
be disciples from within the crowds.
14
The effect of the ambiguous parables is to force a
decision about Jesusone must either become His disciple or turn away. Just as in
11:15, so also in 13:9. He who has ears, let him hear serves as an invitation to be-
come part of the in-group of Jesus family, who are privy to the explanations He gives
about the nature of the Kingdom of God. The crowds have to decide whether they will
seek the main teaching by joining the group of disciples and hearing the explanations or
whether they will remain in a state of perpetual wonder regarding what exactly Jesus
meant when He said, The kingdom of heaven is like . . . .

14
A comparison to John 6:68 is insightful. After this many of his disciples turned back and no
longer walked with him. So Jesus said to the Twelve, Do you want to go away as well? Simon Peter
answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed,
and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.

Spring
2010
24
Why Jesus Taught with Parables
Benjamin Cocar, D. Min., Th. D.
Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministry

Jesus spoke all these things in parables to the crowds; he did not speak to them
without a parable. This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet:

I will open my mouth in parables,
I will announce what has been hidden from the foundation of the
world.
1
(Matthew 13:34-35)

While Jesus formulated many utterances as summaries of a sermon or debate,
he set others before his hearers for their contemplation (Mt. 13:24, 31). Most
worthy of mention are those pericopes commonly known as parables.

Jesus was the Master Storyteller. His teaching provoked people to think; it did
not paralyze the listeners. Parables were His most famous characteristic form of
involving people creatively in the process of learning. Mark noted that Jesus
taught them many things by parables (Mk 4:2). Archibald Hunter claims that
35 percent of Jesus teaching in the synoptic Gospels can be found in parabolic
form. He identified certain parables which describe the coming of the kingdom,
others which explain the grace of the kingdom, a third group which portrays the
men of the kingdom and a final collection dealing with the crisis of the king-
dom.
2
A critical question asks, Why did Jesus teach so extensively in par-
ables? As soon as He started teaching them with parables, the disciples asked
Him, Why do You speak to them in parables?" (Mt. 13:10). Since the disciples'
question, countless of students, pastors, and teachers tried to give the best pos-
sible answer to the disciples question. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifi-
cally called parables of the Kingdom.
3

1
Biblical Studies Press. (2005; 2005). The NET Bible First Edition (Noteless); Bible. Eng-
lish. NET Bible (Noteless). Biblical Studies Press.
2
A. H. Hunter, Interpreting the Parables (London:SCM; Philadephia, Westminster, 1980),
44-45.

3
Elwell, W. A., & Comfort, P. W., Tyndale Bible dictionary. Tyndale Reference Library
(Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001), 703.

Spring
2010
25
In order to understand the purpose of Jesus usage of parables, the reader needs
to understand what is a parable? The English word parable refers to a short
narrative with two levels of meaning. The Greek and Hebrew words for parable
are much broader. Jesus parables are both works of art and the weapons he
used in the conflict with his opponents. They were the teaching method he
chose most frequently to explain the Kingdom of God and to show the character
of God and the expectations God has for people.
4

In Sunday School, the teachers are explaining that a parable is an earthly story
with a heavenly meaning, or a heavenly story with an earthly meaning. The
English Dictionary defined the parable as a short allegorical story, designed to
convey some truth or moral lesson.
5

Parable is a transliteration of the Greek parabol, comparison. It can desig-
nate a variety of figurative forms of speech (e.g., Mk 2:19-22; 3:23-25; 4:3-9, 26-
32; 7:15-17; 13:28). But usually a parable is a short discourse that conveys spiri-
tual truth by making a vivid comparison. The truth to be taught is compared to
something in nature or a common-life experience. A parable usually expresses a
single important truth, though occasionally a subordinate feature expands its total
meaning (cf. 4:3-9, 13-20; 12:1-12). A parable draws its hearers to take part in a
situation, evaluate it, and apply its truth to themselves.
6

The parable as a literary method can be understood as an extended simile. The
comparison is expressed, and the subject and the thing compared, explained
more fully, are kept separate. (A simile is simply an expressed comparison: it
typically uses the words like or as).
In the Old Testament, the word mashal was translated as a proverb (1 Sm
24:13; Ez 18:2-3; Prv. 1:1; 10:1); a parable (2 Sm 12:1-4; 2 Sam 14:1-11; Is 5:1-
7). Other meanings were the following: an allegory (Ez 24:2-5; 17:2-10; 20:49-
21:5); and a byword, satire, taunt, word of derision (Hb 2:6; Nm 21:27-30; Dt
28:37; 1 Kgs 9:7). Also, mashal can be translated as discourse (Nm 23:7, 18;

4
Green, J. B., McKnight, S., & Marshall, I. H. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Down-
ers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press. (1992), 591.
5
Merriam-Webster, I. (2003). Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary. (Eleventh ed.).
Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc.. , s.v. Parable.

6
Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. The Bible Knowledge
Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), p.118.

Spring
2010
26
A parable is
something placed
along side some-
thing else for the
purpose of com-
parison.
24:3, 15, 20, 21, 23); riddle (Ps 49:4; Prv. 1:6); or a saying of ethical wisdom (Jb
27:1; 29:1). Thus, the parable in the Old Testament included a much wider vari-
ety of concepts than simply stories that contained moral or spiritual truths.
7

In the New Testament the word parabolee has these meanings: proverb (Lk
4:23); metaphor of figurative saying (Mk 7:14-17; Lk 5:36-38; Mk 2:21-22, Mt
9:16-17); riddle (Mk 3:23); illustration (Mk 13:28); and parable (Mt 13:33). The
Greek verb means "to throw or place alongside." Thus, a par-
able is something placed alongside something else for
the purpose of comparison.
8

A.T. Robertson defined the parable in the broad
etymological sense, as a simile and consequently
finds that our Lord employed this method from the
beginning of His ministry (Mt 5:13-16; 7:3-5,
17-19, 24-27) as a literary device. There is no prob-
lem with this kind of classification or usage of the par-
able. Jesus used the parables in a special sense when
He was accused of being under Beelzebub.
Others have a narrower definition of the parable and say that Christ did not use
the parabolic device at first, but introduced it later in teaching the "mysteries of
the kingdom," as recorded in Matthew 13 and Mark 4.
This short paper will answer two questions: why did Jesus use parables in His
teaching? and, when did He start using the parables? It is not in the scope of
this paper to analyze all the parables that Jesus used during His entire ministry,
nor to explain the meaning of the parables of Jesus. There are many available
resources for those subjects.
9

This paper will focus on these two questions because the answer to both ques-
tions seems to be only one answer! When Jesus started His earthly ministry,
He called people to repent for the Kingdom of heaven was at hand, (Mt 4:17;

7
Francis, Brown S.R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old
Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906, 1951, s.v. Parable.

8
Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich. An English-Greek Lexicon of the NT and Other Early Christian
Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1975, s.v. Parable.
9
See the short bibliogrpahy at the end of this article.

Spring
2010
27
Mk 1:15). Jesus announced the Kingdom and the simple way of receiving it.
Both John the Baptist and Jesus called people to repent as a way of entering the
Kingdom. Jesus told Nicodemus to be born again in order to see, and/or to enter
the Kingdom of God, (Jn 3). In the beginning of His ministry, the parables were
not part of Jesus teaching. As He proclaimed the message of repentance, His
words were declarative and forceful. Contrary to the interpretations of some cur-
rent scholars, He did not continue in the tradition of the rabbis of the day, but had
a new and innovative message. McKnight argued that Jesus took popular
prayers and other sayings from those days and elevated them to His level.
10
Je-
sus preached the Sermon on the Mountain, and He reversed a lot of what was
said before. He did not add a couple of points to the Law of Moses, but He
changed it after He had fulfilled it! He gave a new command, not a revised ver-
sion of the old commandment. Jesus was teaching with power and conviction.
His preaching was called kerygma, proclamation! Jesus proclaimed the euan-
gelion, the good news. Jesus was the King proclaiming His Kingdom! He
spoke as One who had power, (Lk 4:32). His enemies declared that no one
ever spoke like this man! (Jn 7:46).
He was not one of the masters of the day--He was The Master teacher! When
Jesus went to Bethany, John recorded these words: The Teacher is here and is
calling for you. In Matthew 11:28-29, Jesus called all the weary and heavy-
laden to give them rest and learn from Me. The Master Teacher had all the
tools available to make His message clear, but He did not use the parables, be-
cause He had a plan when and why to introduce the parables. Jesus preached
and taught for almost two years before He introduced the parables in His teach-
ing. During the second year of His ministry, Jesus was accused of being demon
possessed (Mt. 12:24; Mk 3:22). The leaders of Israel inferred that He was
working with Beelzebub and not with Gods power as He claimed. At that point,
Jesus pronounced the danger of the unforgivable sin (Mt. 12:30-31). It was a
very dramatic moment in the history of Israel. The nation of Israels leaders re-
fused to follow Jesus, and they rejected Him from the days of His coming into the
world (Mt. 2:16-23), but this moment was different. The leaders of Israel
crossed a line of no-return! Jesus offered them the Kingdom for which they were
waiting, but they were rejecting the King, and thus they rejected the Kingdom.
The people of Israel had the opportunity to have the reality of Gods Kingdom,
but they did not believe Jesus and His claims. Jesus loved the people of Israel
and made it clear that His message was for the lost sheep of the people of Is-

10
Scott McKnight, The Jesus Creed. Brewster, MA: Paraclete Press, 2004), 17-20.

Spring
2010
28
He was no
longer offering
the Kingdom to
that
generation.
rael, (Mt. 15:24). He did not want to take the bread from the children and give it
to the dogs! He wanted the children of Israel to eat the Bread that came from
heaven, but they left Him, (Jn 6:66). He came to His own, but they received Him
not! When it was clear that Israel rejected Him and His Kingdom, Jesus turned
to speak in parables because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing
they do not hear, no do they understand (Mt. 13:13).
After Jesus was accused of being empowered by Beelzebub, Jesus started to
use the parables. Although it can be argued that it was a change in style, the
context demonstrates that was more than that. It was a change the the
essence of His treaching. The parables can be a literrary device
to help someone to understand a message, but
Jesus introduced the parables not to make it
easier for the people of Israel to understand His
message, but to make it harder! It is clear that
Jesus did not use the parables like other
teachers were using them. He declared His
purpose in teaching with parables. He wanted
the generation that rejected Him to be blind and deaf
to His teachings. It seems clear that Jesus shifted His
focus from the people of Israel to His disciples, and to the future
eclessia, or to a generation that will bring fruit. The Kingdom that was promised
to the people of Israel was postoponed. Jesus was aware that His own people
rejected Him and His message. Not long after the the parables became His main
style of teaching, Jesus announced the eklessia (Mt. 16:18). For the present
age, the Church will carry Gods program, not the Kingdom. The Kingdom will be
repesented as a spiritual reality in the lives of those who receive Jesus as Lord.
The Apostle John devoted half of his Gospel describing the last week of Jesus
life before His death and resurrection. There is a consensus among the NT
commentators that Jesus discussions in the Gospel of John were private,
designatged for His disciples only. He was no longer offering the Kingdom to
that generation. Even the parables of His last week, before the crucifixion, (Mt.
21-22) although they touched on the national rejection of His kingship, did not
offer the nation of Israel as a whole the possiblity of returning to Jesus. Why did
Jesus teach with parables during this time? Kistemaker argued that Jesus used
the parables as a literary device in order to "communicate the message of salva-

Spring
2010
29
tion in a clear and simple manner."
11
There is no doubt that this can be a normal
sense of someone using the parables, but Jesus did not give this answer to His
disciples. Jesus gave this answer to His disciples: I am teaching with parables
to conceal my teachings from those outside (Mk 4:10-12), and to reveal and illus-
trate My message to you, My followers.
Robert Stein has a masterful chapter on The Parables of Jesus in which he
sets forth three reasons: (1) to conceal His teaching from those outside (cf. Mk
4:1012; Mt. 11:2527); (2) to illustrate and reveal His message to His followers
(Mk 4:34); and (3) to disarm His listeners (12:111; Lk 15:12).
12
It is true that a
parable disarms the listener, but Jesus was not looking for dramatic effects to His
presentation. He proclaimed the Kingdom with the authority of the King! Jesus
came to His own (Jn 1:11-12), but His own received Him not. Once the Light
came into the world, the world loved darkness more than the Light (Jn 3:19).
Parables withdrew the light from those who loved darkness. They protected the
truth which they enshrined from the mockery of the scoffer. They reveal, on the
other hand, a message to seekers after the truth. Although the parables can
help any communicator to convey his message much more easily, because they
attract and, when fully understood, are sure to be remembered, Jesus did not
use them for this reason. Parables greatly help the mind and thinking faculty;
they are a great help to memory. Also, parables stir up, or excite the affections,
and awaken consciences, and arrest and hold attention. Parables preserve the
truth that was communicated.
Jesus employed a variety of creative methods such as overstatement (Mk 5:29
30); proverb (6:4); paradox (12:4144); irony (Mt 16:23); hyperbole (23:2324);
riddle (11:12); simile (Lk 13:34); pun (Mt16:18); allusion (Jn 2:19); and metaphor
(Lk 13:32).
Locyer listed Finis Dakes seven beneficial reasons for using parables:
1. To reveal truth in interesting form and create more interest (Mt 13:10-11;
16)
2. To make known new truths to interested hearers (Mt 13:11-12; 16-17)

11
Simon Kistemaker, The Parables of Jesus. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980),
xviii.

12
Stein, 35.

Spring
2010
30
The parables of
Jesus may have
had the effect
of hardening
the unbeliever
.
3. To make known mysteries by comparison with things already known (Mt
13:11)
4. To conceal truth from disinterested hearers and rebel heart (Mt 13:11-15)
5. To add truth to those who love it and want more of it (Mt 13:12)
6. To take away from those who hate and do not want it (Mt 13:12)
7. To fulfill prophecy (Mt 13:14, 17, 35).
13

Although the parables help the listener to more easily under-
stand a concept or a new thing, Jesus did not introduce the
parables for this reason. In fact, this author believes that
Jesus did not use parables in His early ministry, until the
dramatic moment in Matthew 13 or Mark 4.
The initial five of these special parables about the King-
dom (four in Matthew 13 and one in Mark 4) were ad-
dressed primarily to the general public in Israel, not to the
disciples. The stated purpose of these parables was about
the "mysteries of the kingdom of heaven." It is good to remember that ordinarily,
the use of such similes and comparisons was intended to aid in the understand-
ing of something (Lk 6:39). But the parables about the mysteries of the Kingdom
were not primarily so intended. On the contrary, we are told by the Lord Himself,
their purpose was to hide rather than to reveal.
In reply to the disciples' question as to why He spoke to the multitudes in par-
ables, the Lord explained that it was "Because...to them it is not given to know
the mysteries of the kingdom (Mt 13:10-11). The Kingdom parables must be re-
garded as a divine judgment upon the nation of Israel. They refused the simple
announcement of the Kingdom, and because of their refusal, God spoke in such
a way that they could not understand, (Is 6:9-10). When Israel rejected Jesus
and did not want Him to rule over them, Jesus turned to the parables to hide his
message from them. Until His ascension, Jesus did not offer the Kingdom again
to His generation. His generation was locked in unbelief. But, the mystery par-
ables of the Kingdom had also a beneficent purpose (Mt 13:51-52). For the dis-

13
Herbert, Lockyer, All the Parables of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1963), 17-18.


Spring
2010
31
ciples of Jesus, the parables had the effect of revealing the mystery of the King-
dom. Each parable illustrates what the Kingdom was like and how the Kingdom
can be received. Some have found Mark 4:1012 very difficult to understand,
for it seems to suggest that Jesus purpose in the parables was not to enlighten
the unenlightened, but that the unbeliever might become hardened in his unbe-
lief. It is possible, however, that what seems to be a clause of purpose in Mark.
4:12 is in fact a clause of consequence (also Mt. 13:13). The parables of Jesus
may have the effect of hardening the unbeliever, just as Isaiah prophesied with
regard to the effects of preaching the Word of God. The truth is that Jesus par-
ables are unique. The parables of other teachers can to some extent be sepa-
rated from the teachers themselves, but Jesus and His parables are inseparable.
To fail to understand Him is to fail to understand His parables. For those outside
everything is in parables (Mk 4:11); the whole of Jesus ministry, not merely the
parables, remains on the level of earthly stories and portents devoid of any
deeper significance. Here parables have virtually come to mean riddles. It is,
therefore, possible for men to decline the invitation to understanding and com-
mitment found in the parables, and in them Isaiahs prophecy (Is. 6:9f.) is fulfilled
(cf. Jn 12:40 where the same prophecy is cited with reference to the disbelief of
the Jews in the face of Jesus mighty works).
14

It is clear that Jesus used parables as way of communicating Gods truth and that
He taught with parables with a clear purpose in mind, to reveal and conceal!
The Kingdom was taken away from that generation (Rom 9:10-11), until they will
see coming again to rule on this earth (Rv. 19:11-16). Paul the Apostle insisted
that because of Israel's hardened attitude the message of "God's salvation" has
been sent directly to Gentiles where it would find a positive response. In Acts
28:28, Paul documented this point by quoting Isaiah 6:9-10. In quoting this
prophecy, Paul was not just explaining Israel's stubbornness; he stressed it fur-
ther by showing that in the providence of God, redemption was now being offered
directly to Gentiles and they were responding. Jesus turned to the parables at
the moment when the Kingdom was taken from that generation and offered to the
Church.

14
Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. New Bible Dictionary (3rd ed.) (Leicester, England;
Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 869.

Spring
2010
32
Bibliography of Sources Consulted
Batey, A. Richard. ed. New Testament Issues. New York: Harper and Row, 1970.

Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich. An English-Greek Lexicon of the NT and Other Early
Christian
Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1975.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub-
lishing Company, 1939.
Biblical Studies Press. (2005; 2005). The NET Bible First Edition (Noteless); Bi-
ble. English. NET Bible (Noteless). Biblical Studies Press.
Blomberg, Craig. Interpreting the Parables. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 1989.
Brown, Colin. Miracles and the Critical Mind. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1984.
Brown Francis, S.R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of
the Old Tes-
tament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906, 1951.

Elwell, W. A., & Comfort, P. W. (2001). Tyndale Bible Dictionary. Tyndale refer-
ence library (703). Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers.

Erickson, J. Millard. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1983.

Green, J. B., McKnight, S., & Marshall, I. H. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels
(591). Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1992.

Hunter, H, Archibald. Interpreting the Parables. London:SCM; Philadephia,
Westminster, 1980.

Kistemaker, Simon. The Parables of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1980, 1989.


Spring
2010
33
Lockyer, Herbert. All the Parables of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Pub-
lishing House, 1963.

McClain, J. Alva. The Greatness of the Kingdom. Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books,
1959.

McKnight, Scott. The Jesus Creed. Brewster, MA: Paraclete Press, 2004.

Merriam-Webster, I. (2003). Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary. (Eleventh
ed.). Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc.. , s.v. Parable.

Stein, Robert. An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus. Philadelphia: Westmin-
ster, 1981.

Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. The Bible Knowl-
edge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton, IL: Victor
Books, 1983.

Wenham, David. The Parables of Jesus. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1989.

Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. New Bible Dictionary (3rd ed.) Leicester, Eng-
land; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996.


Spring
2010
34
The Purpose of the Parable
Of the Good Samaritan

By Hal M. Haller, Jr., Th. M., M. Ln.
Librarian
Assistant Professor of Bible and Theology

The parable of the Good Samaritan is one of Jesus best known parables, but
may not be among the best understood so far as its purpose is concerned. In the
popular understanding, in particular, the parable is a practical lesson about dem-
onstrating boundless compassion for others. The parable is usually thought to
exhibit an edifying example of how we are to love our neighbor sacrificially.
While there is great value for the Christian in studying it for this purpose, it is not
the immediate purpose of the parable in its context.

In more scholarly circles, it is usually recognized that there is a theological pur-
pose that is served by its inclusion in Jesus teaching. This article will seek to
disclose that purpose from the parables relationship to its immediate context,
1
its
relationship with other related passages, and its relationship with some central
soteriological concepts involving law and grace. Lastly, the article will consider
briefly alternative explanations for the purpose of the passage and a critique of-
fered.
Development of the Parable in Context vss. 10:25-37
The outline of the parable may be described as the setting of the parable, the tell-
ing of the parable, and the application of the parable. Each sequence is inti-
mately related, progressively building on each prior component. In its entire de-
velopment Jesus is skillfully taking a person who has challenged Him to a suc-
cessfully argued and acknowledged conclusion.

1
Some scholars have broken Luke 10:25-37 into two separate pericopes (10: 25-28 and
10:29-37) that were juxtaposed by a redactor; it is not one literary unit that reflects an extended
conversation with the lawyer on one particular occasion. The unity is allegedly artificial. See for
instance, Rudolph Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, rev ed., trans John Marsh
(Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1963, p. 178. This article assumes the unity of this section. See H.
Wayne House for a defense of that unity in The Parable of the Good Samaritan: Implications for
the Euthanasia Debate Issues in Law and Medicine 159 (Fall 1995), pp. 2-4.
http://www.hwhouse.com/files/writings/articles/uploads/parable%20of%20good%20samaritan.pdf
(web site: Last accessed November 18, 2009)

Spring
2010
35
The setting of the parable shows how Jesus is approached by one wishing to test
Him on a theological question. Jesus, in turn, turns the conversation around so
that the questioner himself is tested and found wanting.
The Setting of the Parable: The Inquiry
Regarding Eternal Life vss. 10:25-28

25
And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested
2
Him, saying, Teacher,
what shall I do to inherit
3
eternal life?
26
He said to him, What is written in
the law? What is your reading of it?
27
So he answered and said, You shall
love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your
strength, and with all your mind,
4
and your neighbor as yourself.
5

28
And
He said to him, You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.
6

2
The Greek word, ekpeirazw, is used here. It is the word meaning to put to the test. It
is used four times in the New Testament. The same word is used elsewhere of Satan testing
God in the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness or of believers testing Christ (Matt. 4:7; Luke
4:12; I Cor. 10:9). The word suggests that the lawyer was not predisposed to receive truth, but to
debate it. Furthermore, its aim seems to be that of entrapment. His desire then was to put Jesus
on the spot before His hearers. The purpose would, no doubt, be to discredit Him by making
himself look wiser than Jesus. This rules out the sincerity of the lawyers motive.

3
The word, inherit, can mean something that is free or something that is merited. See
Joseph Dillow, The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Spring, FL: Schoettle Publishing Co.,
1992, pp. 43-110 for examples of these uses. In footnote 17 on page 64 he states, The parallel
passages, Lk. 10:25 and 18:18, also demonstrate the kleronomeo can include the idea of merit.

4
This quote from Deuteronomy 6:5 refers to the requirement for the absolute love of
Yahweh in a total personal response. Joseph A. Fitzmyer. The Gospel According to Luke X-
XXIV. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1985, p. 878. The term for love is the Hebrew word,
àhab. When àhab is used of a persons love for God in Deuteronomy, it is virtually synony-
mous with obedience (Deut. 11:1, 18-22; 13:4-5). J. Carl Laney. God. Nashville: Word, p.
192. Cf. Jn. 14:15.

5
This appeal to Leviticus 19:18 is reiterated by NT writers (Gal. 5:14; Rom. 13:9; Jas.
2:8) where the love of neighbor is regarded as the summation of the Mosaic Law. Fitzmyer, p.
878. The first commandment--love for God is demonstrated by the second commandment--love
for ones neighbor (Matt 22:37-40 with I Jn. 4:20).

6
`This do, and you shall live is reminiscent of Leviticus 18:5 which verse was used by
the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians to condemn the Judaizers. T.C. Smith. The
Parable of the Good Samaritan. 47:4 Review and Expositor, (1950), p. 435. See Galatians 3:11-
12 where Paul repudiates the Judaizers position that we are justified by the law rather than by
faith. The Jews show evidence of having regarding Lev. 18:5 to refer to a promise of eternal life:
`Do this and you will live . . . contains an illusion to Lev. 18:5: `You shall keep My stat-
utes and My ordinances, which if a person do, he shall live by them (with the pertinent

Spring
2010
36
A lawyer, an expert in Jewish law or Torah scholar, confronts Jesus with the
question, "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus, instead of saying, "Be-
lieve on me for eternal life," as He did on numerous occasions (e.g. Jn. 3:14, 16;
6:40, 47),
7
refers him to the law to supply the answer to his question. After the
lawyer quotes from Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18, Jesus tells him he
must keep what the law requires - to love God and neighbor supremely. Jesus
acknowledges that his answer is correct.
The Telling of the Parable vss. 10:29-35
The next segment involves a second question from the lawyer. He expects Je-
sus to further clarify what must be done to inherit eternal life. Jesus does not
give a formal explanation, but a specific example of what He is talking about with
regard to love of neighbor, the text says, But he [the lawyer], wanting to justify
himself, said to Jesus, And who is my neighbor? (Lk 10:29)

elements emphasized). But Lev 18:5 in the Greek and Hebrew versions has to do only
with life in the present age; in these versions the text says nothing about eternal life, the
point of the scribes question. In the Targum, however, Lev 18:5 is understood in an es-
chatological sense: `You should observe My ordinances and My laws, which if a person
practices them, he shall live by them in eternal life (Tg. Onq. Lev 18:5; cf. Tg. Ps.-J Lev
18:5: . . . he shall live by them in eternal life and shall be assigned a portion with the
righteous). - Craig A. Evans. Jesus and His Contemporaries: Comparative Studies.
Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2001, p. 180.

7
Eternal life in Scripture may refer to a present possession as in Johns Gospel (Jn. 5:24)
or a future reality (Titus 1:2). Eternal life is typically portrayed in the NT as an unmerited gift to be
received (e.g. Rom. 6:23), but on occasion may be seen as a merited experience or reward to be
achieved (e.g. Gal. 6:8; I Tim. 6:12). Eternal life has both quantitative and qualitative aspects.
One acquires it in its essence as a free gift, but enjoys or experiences it in its fullness through
obedience. Eternal life, like physical life, is free at the beginning, but that life can be barren or
abundant (cf. II Pet. 1:8; John 10:10). G. Michael Cocoris. Galatians: Staying Free. Santa
Monica, CA: G. Michael Cocoris, p. 129. When eternal life is future, the idea of resurrected life in
the millennial kingdom may be in view (Dan. 12:2; cf. Matt. 19:16 with verse 23), though some will
enter in their natural bodies (Isa. 65:20; cf. Matt 25:34 with verse 46. Resurrected life in the king-
dom would be guaranteed, but rewards in it would not. Only the wise would experience that
(Dan. 12:3). The lawyer was thinking of something altogether different than what Scripture per-
mits. He was thinking of the acquisition of eternal life as something totally future because he had
done enough good to merit it. For him eternal life was not free at the beginning because he does
not understand grace (cf. Titus 3:5; Rom. 11:6). The parable of the Good Samaritan raises an
insurmountable challenge to this assumption.


Spring
2010
37
The lawyer asks Jesus, "Who is my neighbor?"
8
The underlying motive that pro-
duced it was the desire to justify himself. The word justify means to vindicate
oneself or show oneself righteous. Those who wish to do good works to obtain
eternal life are confronted by the question, How good is good enough? Those
who realize their dilemma must assure themselves that what is required is do-
able. The question intended to restrict the meaning of the word, neighbor so as to
render the obligation to love ones neighbor more attainable for purposes of in-
heriting eternal life. The law had done its convicting work. The lawyer was un-
easy and now wished to confirm that the task was not too hard for him.
The answer to the question, Who is my neighbor? is given by Jesus in the fol-
lowing parable:
30
Then Jesus answered and said: A certain man went down from Jerusa-
lem to Jericho, and fell among thieves,
9
who stripped him of his clothing,
wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
31
Now by chance a cer-
tain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on
the other side.
32
Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and
looked, and passed by
10
on the other side.
33
But a certain Samaritan, as he

8
The question, `Who is my neighbor? has tacitly introduced excuses for avoiding char-
ity, but Jesus says, in effect, that a slack priest (or lawyer) is less than a caring half-breed.
John W. Sider. Introducing the Parables: a Hermeneutical Guide to Their Meaning. Grand Rap-
ids: Zondervan, 1995, p. 131. The lawyer sought to relieve his guilt. . . . the lawyer feigned igno-
rance. He would be more than willing to practice the law he claimed to honor if only he could fig-
ure out who his neighbor was. - H. Wayne House. The Parable of the Good Samaritan: Impli-
cations for the Euthanasia Debate. Issues in Law and Medicine 159 (Fall 1995), p. 18.
http://www.hwhouse.com/files/writings/articles/uploads/parable%20of%20good%20samaritan.pdf
(web site: Last accessed November 18, 2009) When the lawyer asks the question, Who is my
neighbor? he definitely confesses that he has not loved his neighbor because he does not even
know who his neighbor is. T. C. Smith. The Parable of the Good Samaritan. Review and
Expositor, 40:4 (1950), p. 436. T. W. Manson adds this thought: The context of Lev. 19:18
shows plainly enough that `neighbor means fellow-Israelite. The Sayings of Jesus. Grand Rap-
ids: Eerdmans, 1979, p. 261. See Lev. 19:11, 15, 17, 18b. At least it means that, though argu-
ments could be marshaled that show that one who was entitled to consideration could reach be-
yond that (e.g. Lev. 19:34; Exod. 22:21).

9
The road from Jerusalem to Jericho (about 17 miles) passes through country which is
`desert and rocky (Josephus, War, iv. 474), and suited by nature for the operations of brigands.
Jerome reports that raiding bands of Arabs were active on the road in his day. T. W. Manson.
The Sayings of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979, p. 262.

10
The passing by of the dying man probably has to do with avoidance of ritual defilement
as a greater obligation than possibly saving a life. In the parable, Jesus criticizes a priest and a
Levite for not being willing to risk coming into contact with a corpse. The point seems to be that
they did not know whether or not the man by the side of the road was dead, and they were unwill-

Spring
2010
38
journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion.
34
So he went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine;
11

and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of
him.
35
On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii,
12
gave
them to the innkeeper, and said to him, Take care of him; and whatever
more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you.

In summary a Samaritan stops to help a man who was robbed and beaten and
left for dead. The severely injured man was lying by the side of the road. He
could not help but be noticed. Those who could have helped him and should
have helped him (a priest and a Levite) did not.
13
Only the Samaritan cared
enough to give him aid and see to it that he was restored to health. Yet the Sa-
maritan seemed the least likely to help an injured Jew.
14

ing to risk incurring corpse impurity simply on the chance they might have been able to help. E.
P. Sanders. Jewish Law from Jesus to the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Trinity, 1990), pp. 41-42.
See Lev. 21:11.

11
The Samaritan here renders first aid to the victim. Wine was used to disinfect and
olive oil was a healing agent. Cf. James 5;14, Ìs any one of you sick . . . anoint him with oil.
W. Harold Mare. New Testament Background Commentary: a New Dictionary of Words, Phrases
and Situations in Biblical Order. Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor, 2004, p. 100.

12
Two denarii would be two Roman silver coins worth two days wages; a sizeable sum
in that day for the Samaritan to spend on this stranger. Ibid. Mare, p. 100. The amount under-
scores the generosity of the good Samaritan towards someone he did not even know or with
whom he surely supposed with whom he had little in common. The inn that the money secured
meant shelter and protection for the convalescing man.

13
Who were the priests and Levites? Both are descendents of Levi. However, the
priests were descendents of a Levite named Aaron. Priests were responsible for offering the sac-
rifices on behalf of Israel and the Levites assisted them, performing lesser duties. Priests and
Levites were official religious leaders whose formal ministry was centered in the temple in Jerusa-
lem during the time of Jesus. As a class they were wealthy. The Levite and priest were traveling
down from Jerusalem to Jericho where large numbers of priests lived, making them an attractive
target for robbers. Brad H. Young. The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation.
Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998, p. 104. As leaders they were aware of the requirements of
the law in Lev. 19:18 to love ones neighbor, but they did not bother on this occasion to do so. A
certain irony may be detected here. No doubt they had just been ministering in Jerusalem in their
holy office, but here they failed in holy behavior when off-duty. They continued the work of the
robbers, abandoning the wounded man to die.

14
The Jews and the Samaritans historically and socially were at odds with each other.
See 2 Kings 17:24ff.; Ezra 4; John 4:9; 8:48. Samaritans were not pure blooded Israelites. They
were half-breeds, a combination of Assyrian and Israelite stock. Their worship was regarded as
heretical. It was located at Mount Gerizim, not Jerusalem. They accepted only the Pentateuch
as Scripture.

Spring
2010
39
The parable identifies a neighbor as someone in need, even if he is an enemy
(cf. Mt 5:43-44). A neighbor might be unknown, unfriendly, unlovely, and unre-
warding, but he is still to be loved. One is to have the same regard for him as
oneself. Yet, Jesus after identifying who is a neighbor, moves on to show that
there should be a greater concern: that of being a neighbor. Thus Jesus places
emphasis on rendering help rather than receiving it.
The Application of the Parable vss. 10:36-37
The parable is now applied by Jesus first with a question followed by an obliga-
tion to which the lawyer has in principle already agreed when he answered the
question. Jesus, therefore, skillfully uses a set up technique. The parable on the
surface seems not to relate at all to the lawyer. It is disarming. With his guard
down the lawyer renders a verdict regarding his own behavior.
15
Jesus asks,
36
So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among
the thieves?
37
And he [the lawyer] said, He who showed mercy on him.
Then Jesus said to him, Go and do likewise. [and you will live].
"Who was the neighbor (or one who acted in a neighborly fashion)?" asked Je-
sus.
16
The lawyer responds, "He who showed mercy." Jesus tells the lawyer to
go and do likewise if he wished to love his neighbor as himself and thus procure
eternal life by doing so. Jesus knew his heart was not inclined to do so, and,
therefore, needed to confront him with his sin and his need of a Savior. Should
the lawyer subsequently reflect on the parable, it would not take long to figure out
that he was like the wounded man in the parable - helpless to save himself, and

15
To put it another way, the lawyer is very much like a schoolboy who is permitted to
make up an examination for someone else. Then he is given the exam. When he takes it, he
finds himself flunking it. Jesus examination of the lawyer via the parable shows the lawyer does
not love his neighbor as himself nor has he been a neighbor, nor is it likely he would be inclined
to begin doing so.

16
Hence the parable ends with a twist. One would have expected the neighbor to be
the injured man. This would then be the type of person the lawyer is to love as himself (v. 27).
However, Jesus phrases the question in such a way . . . indicating that a neighbor is not just
someone in need but someone who cares for someone in need. The lawyer then not only dis-
covers who his neighbor is but that he himself is to be a neighbor. Thus there are neighbors who
are benefactors (the Good Samaritan) and neighbors who are beneficiaries (the injured man).
Andy P. Stanley. Did Jesus Teach Salvation by Works? The Role of Works in Salvation in the
Synoptic Gospels. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2006, p. 212.

Spring
2010
40
that he must depend upon the neighborliness and mercy of the Despised One
(Jesus) to experience salvation.
17

Literary Analysis of Luke 10:25-37
Literary analysis of the parable in its context helps elucidate the development of
the parable in its context. Kenneth Bailey gives an excellent literary analysis of
the movement of the passage in demonstrating how the parable of the Good
Samaritan relates back to the question the lawyer asked Jesus and how it identi-
fies what key concepts are involved:
Round One
Lawyer-Question 1 What must I do to inherit eternal life?
Jesus-Question 2 What about the law?
Lawyer-Answer 2 Love God and your neighbor.
Jesus-Answer 1 Do this and live.
Round Two
Lawyer-Question 1 Who is my neighbor?
Jesus: The parable of the Good Samaritan
Question 2 Which of these three became a neighbor?
Lawyer-Answer 2 The one who showed mercy on him.
Jesus-Answer 1 Do and keep on doing this.
18
[and you will live]

The reader will note two key words that link the two rounds together: the word
(poieo), to do in 10:25, 28, 37 (twice) and plesion, neighbor) in 10:27, 29, 36.
The word, do, throughout relates to how one acquires eternal life. The use of the
present imperative () in 10:28 and 37 indicates that neighborly obligations
are to be performed continuously as need arises.

17
The writer is not suggesting that an allegorical interpretation is to be employed here.
The main point of the parable literally applies to the lawyer to answer the question, Who is my
neighbor? or the question that should have been asked, How may I be a neighbor? The Sa-
maritan in the parable represents how the lawyer should behave as a neighbor. Nevertheless,
the principle of grace for the undeserving and mercy for those unable to save themselves repre-
sents what Jesus is all about. He came to seek and to save that which was lost (Luke 19:10).

18
Kenneth E. Bailey. Poet and Peasant: a Literary-Cultural Approach to the Parables in
Luke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1976, p. 74.

Spring
2010
41
Does the parable
of the Good Sa-
maritan teach
good works for
salvation?
Note also the connection between love (agapao) in 10:27 and the idea of com-
passion (splanchnizomai) in 10:33 and mercy (helios) in 10:37 which depict the
central action of the parable. At the center of the story is a man who needed
compassion, but, more importantly, another who was willing to give it. The Sa-
maritan is definitely the hero when contrasted first to the robbers and then to the
men who were supposed to, but did not, offer aid to an injured man.
A sharp contrast is found between what the robbers did to the injured man and
what the Samaritan did for the man as a result of his compassion
to reverse the mans misfortune:
THE ROBBERS (1)
1. took his money
2. beat him
3. left him half dead (and will not return)
THE SAMARITAN (1)
1. spent his own money
2. cared for him.
3. left him cared for and promised to return.
19

Furthermore, there is a sharp contrast between two individuals who had the op-
portunity to help the injured man, but did not and one who did:
THE PRIEST: passed by on the other side
THE LEVITE: came and looked, and passed by on the other
side
THE SAMARITAN: did whatever it took to get the injured man well.

The contrast is stunning. Jews in good standing were often referred to as
Priests, Levites, and the people of Israel which might include proselytes. One
would have expected that Jesus would have chosen a lay person to complete the
contrast, but he does not include a Jew; He includes a Samaritan
20
a half-breed

19
Bailey, p. 73.

20
Michel Gourgues. The Priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan Revisted: a Critical Note
on Luke 10:31-35 Journal of Biblical Literature 117/4 (1998), pp. 709-713. Priests, Levites, and
all the people, the priests and the Levites and the people of Israel, the priests, the Levites, and
the children of Israel the exact formulations may vary, but ancient Judaism and the OT use this
tripartite division in order to give account of the composition of religious society in its diversity. -
p. 710 According to this traditional tripartite division, one would expect the narrative to bring on
stage next a lay Israelite. And so it is totally unexpected to see a Samaritana representative of

Spring
2010
42
heretic who fulfills the law better than the pillars of Jewry.
21
It was typical for
there to be a perpetual state of mutual disrespect and hostility between Jews and
Samaritans. The enemies of Jesus called him a Samaritan when they wished to
belittle Him (John 8:48). Jesus himself was the object of the Samaritans insult-
ing inhospitality (Lk 9:53). Eating with Samaritans was equated with eating pork
(m. Seb. 8:10; b. Sanh 57a). Such people were unclean and were to be
avoided.
22
To use the Samaritan as the hero of the story is like using a Jew as a
hero in a story told to Palestinians or a Turk as a hero to an Armenian.
The parable has many interpretive issues and practical import, but the interpreter
must always return to that question the lawyer originally asked, What must I do
to inherit eternal life? because the parable is designed to answer that question.
Stanley has noted that this topic has rarely even been raised with respect to this
parable.
23
Stephen F. Noll does call attention to this issue by saying, The par-
able of the Good Samaritan . . .seems to promote a kind of works righteousness .
. . Its punch lines . . . both say: `Go and do!
24
It is obvious from the parable that
such works may involve heroic efforts of compassion.
Does the parable of the Good Samaritan teach good works for salvation? Before
that question is finally answered, it would be well to consult some related material
in Luke and then from the rest of Scripture regarding the subject of law and
grace.
Significant Passages in Luke
There are significant passages in Luke that speak to the issues raised by the
lawyer. First, there is the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector regarding
justification, followed next by the lesson of the children regarding entrance into

one of the groups that all agreed to exclude from the category of neighborcome on the scene
and provide the answer to the question `Who is my neighbor? (10:29). p. 713.

21
Archibald Hunter, Interpreting the Parables. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960,
p. 73.

22
Darrell Bock, Luke. v. 2, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996, p. 1031.

23
Alan P. Stanley. Did Jesus Teach Salvation by Works? The Role of Works in the
Synoptic Gospels. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2006, p. 214.

24
Stephen F. Noll. The Good Samaritan and Justification by Faith, Mission and Ministry
8 (1990), p. 36.


Spring
2010
43
the kingdom, and finally the account of the rich young ruler who asks an identical
question to that of the lawyer: Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector vss. 18:9-14
9
Also He spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they
were righteous, and despised others:
10
Two men went up to the temple to
pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
11
The Pharisee stood
and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank You that I am not like other
menextortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector.
12
I fast
twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.
13
And the tax collector,
standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat
his breast, saying, God, be merciful to me a sinner!
14
I tell you, this man
went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who ex-
alts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.
The point of this parable is that those like the Pharisees who justify themselves
are not justified before God whereas those like the tax collector who admit their
sin and rely on Gods mercy are justified. Foundational to being justified is hav-
ing an attitude of humility as the tax collector.
25
The contrast between the lawyer
and the tax collector may be noted here. The lawyer sought to justify himself
whereas the tax collector looked to God without any works to boast about for jus-
tification and received it.
Christ Blesses the Children
Luke 18:15-17; cf. Matt. 19:1315; Mark 10:1316

15
Then they also brought infants to Him that He might touch them; but when
the disciples saw it, they rebuked them.
16
But Jesus called them to Him and
said, Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such
is the kingdom of God.
17
Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive
the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.

The parable of the Pharisee and the publican is followed by an account of Jesus
using childlikeness as a lesson regarding those who will enter the kingdom. The

25
In contrast to the scrupulously religious Pharisees, toll and tax collectors for the Ro-
mans were hated by the Jews and known for their extortion (cf. Luke 19:8), yet Jesus chooses to
put a tax collector in a favorable light in this parable because he had more humility than the self-
righteous Pharisee(cf. Matt. 21:31-32).


Spring
2010
44
point is that humble childlike trust is that which enables one to enter; those who
do not possess it cannot enter. Such humble and childlike trust results in justifi-
cation before God (Lk 18:14), placing an individual sinner in the position of secur-
ing righteousness that exceeds the righteousness of the Pharisees which is nec-
essary for entrance into the kingdom (Rom 4:5; Mt. 5:20).
No sooner does Jesus speak about the kind of person who will enter the kingdom
(i.e. one who has childlike humble faith), one comes along seeking entrance into
it who does not possess this qualification. Like the Pharisee and unlike the chil-
dren, he is absorbed in his own righteousness, wishing to justify himself (cf. Lk
18:11-12; Lk 10:29).
Rich Young Ruler - Luke 18:18-27; Matt. 19:1626; Mark 10:1727
The soteriology of this pericope has been treated in some detail elsewhere by the
writer.
26
Suffice it to say that the lesson derived from that account is that if no
one is as good as God, no one can be truly good and if no one can be truly good,
no one can be good enough to merit eternal life so as to live with a holy God for-
ever no matter how much one might try to keep the law or how much one might
give up or how hard one tries to imitate Christs sinless life in discipleship. Jesus
lesson is directed towards a self-righteous man of wealth and influence who
equates wealth with righteousness and therefore, acceptance with God. But his
belief still leaves him with a sense of inadequacy. The account explains why
people are excluded from the kingdom and eternal life. They wish to earn it by
works. To do otherwise is to attempt the impossible given our sinful condition.
Only the grace of God in which God does exclusively for man what he cannot do
for himself will secure salvation (Lk. 18:27).
Parallels with the Rich Young Ruler
The following show the parallelism between the account of the rich young ruler
and the incident with the lawyer in Luke 10:25-37.
1. Both questioners test Jesus with the same question
The lawyer asks, Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? (Lk. 10:25)

26
Hal M. Haller. Did the Rich Young Ruler Hear the Gospel According to Jesus? Jour-
nal of the Grace Evangelical Society. 13:25 (Autumn 2000), pp.
http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2000ii/Haller.htm.

Spring
2010
45
The Rich Young Ruler asks, Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal
life? (Lk. 18:18; cf. Mk. 10:17 and Mt. 19:16).
2. Both questioners are leaders with a reputation for moral and spiritual rectitude.
Lawyer: The lawyer was an expert in the Jewish law. Others looked to him
for instruction and example.
Rich Young Ruler: The rich young ruler had an exalted view of his own good-
ness (Lk 18:21) and was wealthy, a sign taken by many in his day that he
was righteous (cf. v. 24-25).
3. Jesus tests both questioners by the law.
Lawyer:
26
He said to him, What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?
27
So he answered and said, You shall love the LORD your God with all
your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,
and your neighbor as yourself.

Rich Young Ruler
20
You know the commandments: Do not commit adultery, Do not mur-
der, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor
your father and your mother. Mark 10:19.
Matthew adds, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. (19:19)

It will be noted that both the lawyer and the rich young ruler are tested in accor-
dance with the second table of the law which defines mans responsibility to his
fellow man. Such fulfills the commandment to love ones neighbor as himself (cf.
Mt 19:19). Loving ones neighbor is designated by Jesus as the second greatest
commandment (Mt 22:34-40 and Mk 12:28-34): One who has mastered the sec-
ond greatest commandment has mastered the first For all the law is fulfilled in
one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (Gal 5:14).
4. Both questioners are found wanting.
Lawyer:
28
And He said to him, You have answered rightly; do this and you will
live.
29
But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, And who is my
neighbor?
36
So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him

Spring
2010
46
Both the lawyer
and the rich
young ruler had
failed the test
by law.
who fell among the thieves?
37
And he said, He who showed mercy on
him. Then Jesus said to him, Go and do likewise.

The message here to the lawyer was that the lawyers understanding of
neighborliness needed to be expanded and that his law keeping was defective.
Jesus final word is, Do likewise (being a neighbor like the Good Samaritan)
[and you will live]. The implication is that he is not doing this and hence, does
not deserve eternal life.

Rich Young Ruler:
22
You still lack one thing [to inherit eternal life]. Sell all that you have and
distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, fol-
low Me.
23
But when he heard this, he became very
sorrowful, for he was very rich.
Mark adds, But he was sad at this word, and went
away sorrowful, for he had great possessions (Mk.
10:22).
The lack of the rich young ruler is revealed in his
covetousness as revealed by the law and his unwillingness
to follow Jesus. Coveteousness is forbidden in the law (Ex
20:17) and following involves continuous obedience in self giving
and self-imposed poverty as Jesus Himself exemplified (cf. Mt. 8:20).
Coveteousness is in view since the rich young ruler saw fit to withhold what God
in the flesh had asked him to relinquish. He preferred wealth over the will of
God. As such it was his idol (cf. Col 3:5), demonstrating that he had broken the
greatest commandment: supreme love for God (Mt 22:34-40 and Mk 12:28-34).
If he preferred Gods will he would have followed Jesus.
Both the lawyer and the rich young ruler had failed the test by the law. The con-
sciousness of that failure is implied in the story of the lawyer, but it is made ex-
plicit in the story of the rich young ruler. But in each case Jesus seeks to lead
both to acknowledge that he lacks what is necessary to inherit eternal life.
5. Both questioners are told to continually and sacrificially obey the law.
Lawyer:
28
And He said to him, You have answered rightly; do this and you will
live.
37
Then Jesus said to him, Go and do likewise.

Spring
2010
47
In both of the above verses the present tense of do in the Greek ()
27

indicates that service to others must be continuous. The example set by
the Good Samaritan shows it must also be sacrificial when such is called
for.

Rich Young Ruler:
The word, follow, represents like the word, do, a process. Here the present
active imperative in both instances indicates continuous action is expected.
The nature of the verb also indicates a process as well. If the rich young ruler
follows Jesus, he will be following the perfect law-keeper.

Each is given a perpetual duty to perform that is an application of the law that
may involve sacrificial service. In the case of the lawyer, he did not wish to rec-
ognize his neighborly duties. In the case of the rich young ruler, he did not want
to sacrifice his wealth for the poor. The command to follow Christ is a command
to learn from Him and imitate Him in sinless discipleship.
28

6. Both questioners are told to do that which for them is humanly impossible.
Lawyer:

27
The present active imperative indicating continuous action expected. Doing as the
story suggests involves a lifestyle not just a one time heroic event. Whenever a person is en-
joined to love his neighbor as himself he is to perform this continually without exception as the
need arises. Whenever one sees a person in need and one has the ability to meet that need, he
should do what he can on behalf of the other.

28
Discipleship commands of Jesus, except in this instance, are directed towards believ-
ers. Believers do not have to be perfect with regard to eternal salvation since perfection is pro-
vided for them in imputation and declared to be so in justification. They are expected, however,
to live up to the highest standards of discipleship, but since they still have a sinful nature, it is ex-
pected that they will fail at times and they can be restored to temporal fellowship through I Jn 1:9.
That the discipleship requirement was a counsel of perfection is indicated by the words in Mt
19:21 If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have
treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.

Spring
2010
48
The lawyer was being asked to eliminate his deepest prejudices and act in
perpetual sacrificial love towards those considered his enemies.
29
On one
level the parable does answer the question, Who is my neighbor? A
neighbor is anyone in need, even if it is someone towards whom we have a
strong antipathy as a Samaritan might have for a Jew. Towards such an one
the law enjoins continual sacrificial love. Jesus directives to the lawyer indi-
cate he had not done that, and it is implied that he would not be inclined to do
so even when presented with the opportunity. Though the Samaritan in the
parable overcame his prejudices, the lawyer would find himself unable to do
the same.

Rich young ruler:
The aspect of impossibility is made more explicit in the account of the rich
young ruler. In Jesus explanation to the disciples who exclaimed with
amazement, Who then can be saved? Jesus responded, The things which
are impossible with men are possible with God (Lk 18:27; cf. Mt 19:26 and
Mk 10:27). Matthew records Jesus as saying, With men this is impossible,
but with God all things are possible.

The point is that neither the lawyer nor the rich young ruler was capable of earn-
ing eternal life by something he could do.
7. The Matter of Law and Grace.
The account of the rich young ruler and the lawyer both demonstrate from the
teachings of Jesus that the law was never intended to give eternal life. It was
given to demonstrate that man was a sinner (Rom. 3:9-19), not to save: There-
fore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is
the knowledge of sin (v. 20). It was the law that Jesus used to show the rich
young ruler and the lawyer that they were condemned by the law and could not
save themselves. Whether the lesson hit home so as to drive each man to the
Savior is not stated, but it is there so that any self-righteous sinner may take note
and depend on One who can save him or her.

29
Heretics, informers, and renegades according to one rabbinical saying should be
pushed (into the ditch) and not pulled out." A widespread saying in Israel exempted one's ene-
mies from one's obligation to love others: "You shall love your fellow-countryman; but you need
not love your enemy." - Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus (S.H. Hooke trans., Charles
Scribner's Sons 1963) (1962) (quoting b. 'A.Z. 26a (Bar.)), pp. 202-03.

Spring
2010
49
Historically there have been two ways to obtain eternal life. One is to live a life of
perfection. The other is to trust the One who lived it for us and transferred his
merit to us through His death on the cross and our acceptance of it.
30

The first man, Adam, was given a prohibition and duties to fulfill. The prohibition
was to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gn 2:16-17). The
duties included multiplying and filling the earth as well as exercising dominion on
Gods behalf over it. Adam was created in unconfirmed righteousness, but he
was to function that way through a probationary time frame. If he ate of the for-
bidden fruit, he would be confirmed in sin, would experience death, and denied
access to the tree of life (Gn 2:16-17; 3:19, 22-24). If he remained faithful to
Gods directions, he no doubt would have been confirmed in righteousness and
would have received eternal life.
31
How long that period of probation would have

30
Alan P. Stanley deduces the following, Do they [the Synoptic Gospels] not have a say
on the matter? Both the Rich Young Ruler and the Jewish lawyer asked very similar questions to
that of the Philippian jailer (see v. 29). Should these passages not also have a bearing on how
we understand what one must do to be saved? Ibid., p. 230 n. 60. For him the gospel require-
ments are essentially the same though they may appear different; one stresses works as the
natural result of faith and the other stresses faith as that which gives rise to works. Unfortunately
Stanley does not understand that the questions are answered in Scripture two different ways.
One way to have eternal life is to be perfect (e.g. rich young ruler and the Jewish lawyer); the
other is to trust the One who accounts us perfect through His substitionary atonement. In the first
instance, eternal life comes by our sacrifice (which is impossible to achieve). In the second in-
stance, it comes by faith alone in Christ alone (e.g. the Philippian jailer (Acts 16:31). Similarity of
questions do not guarantee similarity or sameness of answers when the approaches of the ques-
tioners are different. Stanley takes the following stance, Fourth even though works are neces-
sary for salvation Jesus and the Synoptic writers do not mean sinlessor even something simi-
larperfection. p. 336. For a critique of his view the reader is referred to Joseph C. Dillow.
Did Jesus Teach Salvation by Works? A Review. Bibliotheca Sacra 165 (October-December
2008), pp. 463-79.

31
The condition for life given in the Garden of Eden is often referred to as the Covenant
of Works: The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was prom-
ised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.
The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes by G. I. Williamson. Philadelphia, PA:
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1964, p. 63. Since this covenant is anchored
in the nature of God who rewards righteousness, it has transdispensational significance. The
Mosaic covenant can be viewed in some sense as a republication of the covenant of works.
See Bryan D. Estelle. Leviticus 18:5 and Deuteronomy 30:1-14 in Biblical Theological Develop-
ment: Entitlement in Heaven Foreclosed and Proffered. The Law is Not of Faith: Essays on
Works and Grace in the Mosaic Covenant. Ed. by Bryan D. Estelle, J. V. Fesko, David Van-
Drunen. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R, 2009, pp. 109-146. The major differences between the cove-
nant of works presented to Adam and that which is conveyed by the law are that the commands

Spring
2010
50
lasted is not stated. Perhaps it would end with the successful accomplishment of
all the tasks Adam had been given. The sad reality is that he soon sinned before
he could produce any progeny and death passed upon all men because all
sinned in Adam (Rom 5:12). Eternal life could have been won by obedience, but
was forfeited through disobedience.
The second and last Adam, Jesus, came to create a redeemed resurrected race
of men (I Cor 15: 20-28, 35-46). They would be redeemed from the curse of the
fall and given blessing in the eternal state (Rv 21-22). Jesus, our sinless Substi-
tute, died on the cross. There He became sin for us, that we might become the
righteousness of God in Him (2 Cor 5:21). Having provided a perfect right-
eousness for us, all we must do, indeed, all we can do, is simply trust Him for it
as a free gift apart from the works of the law:
But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being wit-
nessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God,
through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe (Rom 3:21-22)
But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly,
his faith is accounted for righteousness (Rom 4:5).
The perfect obedience God demanded for eternal life, He provides freely through
faith alone in Christ alone.
If the lawyer who prompted Jesus to tell the story of the Good Samaritan were to
earn eternal life through the keeping of the law, what would he have to do?
First his obedience would have to be perfect. Galatians 3:10 states,
10
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is
written, Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are
written in the book of the law, to do them.
The demands of the law are outside the reach of anyone to fulfill perfectly. No
one is perfect. The law requires that all things written in the book of the law must
be performed, else a person is under the curse of God. Since we are all sinners
(Rom 3:23) and hence law-breakers (I Jn. 3:4), we are under Gods curse. The
term, curse, reminds us of the consequences of Adams sin in a fallen world

are different and that whereas Adams requirements were doable, the Mosaic covenants re-
quirement are not (in the sense of perfectly performing them). Entitlement to eternal life is based
on Christs, rather than our, obedience.

Spring
2010
51
which can only be reversed in the new heavens and new earth (Gn 3:17; cf. Rv
22:3).
Second, his obedience must be continual. In Galatians 3:10 the curse
abides on those who do not continue in perfect obedience to do the works God
prescribes. To those who would gain immortality (not being subject to death) and
eternal life, continuance in doing good deeds is the absolute standard:
Godwill render to each one according to his deeds: eternal life to those
who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immor-
tality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey
unrighteousnessindignation and wrath (Rom 2:7-8).
From the time one is first held accountable by God until the time he dies, he must
be obedient without breaking a single commandment (Jas 2:10). It is obvious
that the door to eternal life through law keeping is shut since no one continuously
and perfectly keeps the law.
But another door has been opened by Jesus who tasted death for every man
(Heb 2:9). He took our sin and in exchange credits His own (i.e. Gods) right-
eousness to those who believe (Rom 4:5).
Free from the law, O happy condition!
Jesus has died, and there is remission;
Cursed by the law; Ruined by the fall,
Christ hath redeemed us, Once for all.

Once for all, O sinner receive it;
Once for all; O doubter believer it;
Look to the Cross, your burden will fall,
Christ hath redeemed us, Once for all.

- P. P. Bliss

CONCLUSION
What then is the purpose of the Parable of the Good Samaritan? It is to show a
self-righteous lawyer who is a sinner that he cannot be saved by keeping the

Spring
2010
52
One cannot
be saved by
keeping the
law.
law.
32
The law requires universal continuous unbroken perfect obedience. If one
wishes to earn salvation, perfection is the standard. No exceptions can be made.
How else could sinful man live forever with a holy God? Man would always have
the taint of sin and would ruin the very heaven in which God dwells, bringing the
same curse there. A new status must be imputed. A new nature must be be-
stowed. A new body must be provided that does not sin. This is provided as a
gift to anyone who will believe Jesus for it.
Some commentators have bypassed this explanation in favor of another. It is the
explanation that states that Jesus assumed that the lawyer understood that eter-
nal life was non-meritorious and was by faith alone. Jesus then, according to this
explanation, would not be correcting a false assumptionthat of
earning eternal life by good deeds.
33

Other commentators recognize the need for grace in the mes-
sage, but conflate love and faith. The lawyer needed to be told
that faith without works would be ineffective in securing eternal
life. Therefore, he is told in essence, Prove your faith by your
works of love. Robert H. Stein, for instance, recognizes the tension
between Acts 16:31 and Luke 10:27-28. The answer of Acts 16:31 is what most
Christian expect with a higher comfort level whereas Luke 10: 27-28 is discon-
certing for many Christians. Then he attempts to show that the requirement of
faith is so intimately linked to that of love that the two are practically indistin-
guishable, forming the same essential condition for eternal life.
34
I. Howard Mar-

32
The fulfillment of the Law is here pictured as a way of salvationthat is undeniable.
The words of Jesus do not imply that man is able to travel this way. What is tragic is that we sin-
ful human beings cannot achieve such fulfillment. Cf. Ro 3:20; 7:7-12, 18; Gal. 3:0-12, etc. The
lawyer stood in need of being brought to a realization of his inability to keep the Law . . . Wil-
liam F. Arndt. Luke. St. Louis: Concordia, 1956, p. 289. The lawyer probably had a zeal for
God, but as the apostle Paul would say, not according to knowledge and was trying to establish
his own righteousness (Cf. Romans 10:1-5).

33
Many of those who advocate the New Perspective on Paul assume that the Jews be-
lieved in salvation by grace and that they did not have a problem with legalism. The Jews be-
lieved election into the covenant was by grace; works were only necessary to remain in it. This is
a mixture of grace and works that Paul warned about (Rom 11:6). For a critique of the entire
range of New Perspective thinking the reader is referred to By Faith Alone: Answering the Chal-
lenges to the Doctrine of Justification ed. by Gary L. W. Johnson and Guy P. Waters. Wheaton,
IL: Crossway, 2006 and The Gospel of Free Acceptance in Christ: an Assessment of the Refor-
mation and the New Perspective on Paul by Cornelius Venema. Peoria, IL: Banner of Truth,
2006.

34
Robert H. Stein. Luke. Nashville: Broadman Press, 319.

Spring
2010
53
Conviction of
need must
precede the
preaching of
grace.
shall seems to dismiss Jesus answer is a salvation by works answer because
the love God enjoins is an inner disposition, not an outward qualification.
35
But
this is only the unlawful mingling of law and grace. The lawyer was not told to be
willing or desirous of helping his neighbor, but to do it!
Notice, the lawyer does not ask, What must I do to inherit eternal life as a dem-
onstration of my faith in you? Jesus does not say to the lawyer, If you wish to
inherit eternal life, then you must believe on Me and then prove your sincerity by
your works. Jesus simply tells him, Do this and you will live, presenting it as a
lifestyle requirement. The lawyer shows at the outset that he is interested in
earning eternal life through doing something. He believes that he can supply a
work or works that are needed with or without Gods help. It is not a matter of
faith, but performance. Jesus is not telling the lawyer that he is deficient in keep-
ing the law and that he must try harder to demonstrate saving faith. Jesus told
the disciples in the aftermath of the conversation with the rich young ruler, With
men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible (Matt.
19:26). Jesus seems to be making the same point with the
lawyer. His nature and inclinations go against what God
requires for eternal life. Therefore, he must come to the
end of himself and trust Another to accomplish it for him.
While good works are certainly the Christians credentials,
it will not do to impose the morality of the law on those who
are unsaved, unless they are depending on their legalism
and sense no need of a Savior. This is using the law lawfully (I
Tim. 1:8). No message of grace need be given to one who senses
no need of grace. Once the admission of need comes about, then such a person
can be told that he can be saved by grace through faith. Conviction of need must
precede preaching of grace. This is why Jesus did not tell the lawyer, He who
believes in Me has eternal life (Jn 6:47).
Before we dismiss the message of grace from this passage, one should note that
Jesus intent in coming was to seek and to save that which was lost (Lk 19:10).
Though we would shun past allegorical attempts in church history to explain the
purpose of the parable of the Good Samaritan, we would point out that Jesus

35
I Howard Marshall. The Gospel of Luke: a Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978, p. 442. Marshall adds, Similarly, in 18:18-23 alms-giving and dis-
cipleship are the `qualifications for eternal life. He is, of course, appealing to Jesus response to
the rich young ruler which is addressed in this essay.

Spring
2010
54
was skillful in getting people to think. This is why He referred the lawyer to the
law and this is why he used the parable to give a concrete example of the laws
application. We are not told the result, but there can be no doubt that the lawyer
assisted in putting himself in an unfavorable light, thus bringing conviction to his
conscience. The parable was like an unassuming innocent looking booby trap
that exploded in his consciousness.
36

There is no reason to overtly deny that there was one final explosion set to go off
that could be used in bringing the lawyer to Christ after he saw his need. There
are principles embedded within the parable that illustrate how someone who is
lost can be saved. The reader will note that in the parable there is a man in des-
perate need and one who was willing to go to desperate lengths to meet that
need. He risked and gave much to a person he never met and who was identi-
fied socially as an enemy. A paid-in-full rescue at the inn was accomplished for a
man robbed of everything, and hence, had nothing to pay. Here we have a Sa-
maritan, one who was despised who paid a great price and brought physical
healing to the man who was half dead. And in Jesus we have One who was de-
spised (cf. Isa. 53:3; Jn. 1:46; Matt 27:23-44) who paid a great price (cf. Matt
13:44-45; I Cor. 6:20; I Pet 1:18-19) and brought spiritual healing to enemies who
were dead in trespasses and sins (cf. Rom. 5:10; Isa. 53:5 with I Pet 2:24). How
can the lawyer inherit eternal life? By recognizing that he is incapable of saving
himself by doing anything and permitting the Son of rescue him when he has
nothing he can pay! One can readily visualize the lawyer at a future time upon
reflection saying, Yes, I will accept His offer though I dont and never can de-
serve it.
37

Jesus paid it all. All to Him I owe.
Sin had left a crimson stain. He washed it white as snow.

36
Haddon Robinson. Who is My Neighbor? Bryan Life. Winter 1984, p. 5.

37
But where is the power in us to do and to keep doing without a break all that even the
second table of the law requires, to say nothing of the first? Jesus is touching this lawyers con-
science. His command which is so brief and simple, if it is acted on by this lawyer will soon show
him all his selfish lack of love, all his inability to win life eternal by means of love, and thus make
him ready to see . . . the blessedness of the grace which the Messiah Jesus brings to all who ac-
cept him by faith. Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of St. Lukes Gospel. Minneapolis, MN:
Augsburg Publishing, 1946, p. 609.


Spring
2010
55
If you dont
feel literature,
then you arent
really reading.
--Dr. Haddon
Robinson
The Feel of Biblical Narrative Literature
Tony Guthrie, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministry/Preaching
Doctor of Ministry Program Coordinator
Chair of the Department of Pastoral Ministries

A few years ago I was attending a preaching conference with the theme of Creativity in
Preaching. Some of the most respected names from the field of preaching were key-
note speakers and teachers. Among them was Haddon Robinson. I had long desired to
meet Dr. Robinson so I eagerly attended his session on Imagination in Preaching. As
he shared I found myself thoroughly engaged in his presentation. Although he lectured
for almost an hour, there was one line that resonated in my thoughts. The line was sim-
ply, If you dont feel literature, then you arent really reading. He was stressing the idea
of actually becoming a part of the narrative as you read it. I was so intrigued by this
thought that I chose not to stand in the line to meet him after his presentation. Instead, I
took a stroll around the church premises and pondered that one line.
Interestingly, over the years I had stressed this same idea many
times to my students. Now that I had heard Robinson endorse
the idea, I felt particularly vindicated. Too often, as exposi-
tors, we are so engrossed in discovering the spiritual
bottom line of a passage that we miss the true heart of it.
This is particularly true of parabolic or narrative literature.
We tend to practice what I call guessegesis rather then
pure exegesis. If we see a spiritual word (like love) or a
phrase describing a sin (like and he lay with her ) we
eagerly grab hold of it as though it is the Holy Grail of the
passage. Oftentimes these spiritual or sinful words and
phrases are, in actuality, playing a supporting role. The true
star of the story is completely missed because of our quest for
obvious spiritual truth.
This brings me back to Robinsons notion of feeling the literature. I am now convinced,
more than ever, that a significant goal of preaching biblical narrative is to help the lis-
teners feel the story. By feeling it I mean they connect with it emotionally, within their
senses, and in the spirits. In actuality they are lead to discover the meaning and implica-
tions for themselves once they are emotionally and spiritually connected to the story.

Spring
2010
56
I have had the privilege of serving as a Transitional Pastor for a number of years now. I
have served in churches with different approaches to worship and certainly differences
in listeners. I have preached in the most traditional and staid pulpits. I have preached in
blended services. I have also preached in what one might consider the most radical of
contemporary services. I have walked into all of these pulpits having read countless ar-
ticles and chapters on the postmodern listener. I have been duly warned that if I do not
understand certain traits of these different people then my preaching will likely be in
vain.
Please understand, I am not devaluing the information provided by scholars of post-
modernity. I do believe we must take time to study cultural and social realities of our
modern world. But I have wondered many times if the Lord Jesus, if He were preaching
in this century, would change his approach in consideration of the post-modern audi-
ence.
What I have discovered is that a little imagination (to use Robinsons word) is really all
that is needed to connect the text to any listener. Allow me to suggest two ways to ac-
complish this:
1. Become the proverbial fly on the wall
What I mean by this is to change the way you currently read biblical narrative. Rather
than search for what seems to be the obvious spiritual truth, envision the story in your
mind as you read it. I constantly tell my students that I rarely prepare sermons in the
study. I almost always prepare them in the sanctuary. While this may seem radical for
some of you, let me ask what better place to see my listeners? People tend to always sit
in the same place each Sunday. Therefore, I can see each one of them as I process the
implications of the selected text for their lives.
When I am in the sanctuary I read over the narrative countless times. I create in my
mind the actual scene. I imagine I am walking with the Lord observing His actions and
hearing His words. The implications often flow so quickly that I cant jot them down fast
enough. I become a part of the story. Most of us know that we can tell a story so much
better, with vividness and flair, if we were actually a part of the event.
I often shock my students by telling them to avoid the commentaries until after the fly
on the wall process. If we read commentaries initially then commentators will guide our
thinking. Too often they point us to the obvious spiritual words. Rarely do commentators
investigate a narrative from the fly on the wall perspective. Commentaries are best
used, in my opinion, as sources of confirmation rather than directors to truth. We want

Spring
2010
57
to turn to them for verification of our findings and to provide insights we may have
missed or cant discern from a cursory reading of the text. They will help us to see how
the obvious spiritual words fit the narrative. So, become a fly on the wall and avoid
those commentaries at first. This way you will begin to connect with the story. You will
become a part of it.

2. Bring the biblical story into the 21
st
century

Many people love college and professional football. Most of us know what it is
like to attend an actual game. As we drive into the stadium parking lot we struggle with
the lines of traffic and finding a parking space. As we head toward the stadium we walk
with people who typically are dressed in jerseys and colors that represent their team.
We pass by tailgaters cooking burgers and hot dogs. We are accosted by scalpers who
want us to buy a ticket. We pass souvenir stands or individuals wanting us to purchase
stuff related to the home team. As we enter the stadium we hand our tickets to ticket-
takers who scan them and give them back to us. Then, if we are carrying bags, we are
searched to ensure we are not a terrorist. We then look for our seats and wait for the
kickoff.

Suppose we did all these things on a particular Saturday but no teams showed up to
play. There we are with our jerseys, hot dogs, and enthusiasm; but no players actually
play a game. What would we do in such a scenario? Obviously we would begin to
search for answers to this injustice! We would ask people sitting near us, those we dont
even know, Whats the deal? We would check our tickets for date and time. We would
call the ushers over and murmur to them. We would virtually curse the situation. Eve-
rything we have seen, experienced, and had been lead to believe said to us, Game
here today! We would lose our trust in the entire football system.

As you read the above you saw that scene in your mind. There is no way you could not
have. Our minds think in pictures. You may have been at a different stadium rooting for
a different team than I envisoned, but you no doubt created the scene. You even felt
the scene. You felt the injustice. You probably remembered and sensed the smell of
cooking burgers. Even while I am typing this my mouth is watering for a Wendys dou-
ble with cheese!

This reveals the power is bringing the biblical story into the 21
st
century. Now consider
the following narrative from the Gospel of Mark:

Spring
2010
58
12
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry.
13
Seeing in the
distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached
it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs.
14
Then he
said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples
heard him say it.
15
On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and
began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the
tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves,
16
and
would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts.
17
And
as he taught them, he said, "Is it not written:
" 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made
it 'a den of robbers.'"
18
The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this
and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole
crowd was amazed at his teaching.
19
When evening came, they

went out of the
city.

20
In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the
roots.
21
Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you
cursed has withered!"
22
"Have
[d]
faith in God," Jesus answered.
23
"I tell you the
truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does
not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done
for him.
24
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you
have received it, and it will be yours.

In this passage Jesus approached a tree and a temple. Both appeared to be places of
nourishment; one physical, one spiritual. He found both to be fraudulent. Everything
about the tree, from a distance said, Figs here! Everything about the Temple and the
activities surrounding it, from a distance said, God here! But upon close investigation,
both were fraudulent. Both angered the Lord.

Can you see the connection of this story to the football analogy? Can you see how tell-
ing the story of the fraudulent football game, which caused you to feel anger and injus-
tice (and even smell cooking burgers), can be used as a creative and imaginative lead
in to the story in Mark 11?

The implication for the modern audience is simply this: Those who are truly Christians
will not only look the part, but will exemplify the power reserved for those who live in
faith. They will be powerful examples of sacrifice and prominent producers of spiritual
fruit. In other words, they will not be fraudulent.

Spring
2010
59
So, heres the takeaway. I contend that any person from any culture, whether young or
old, male or female, modern or post-modern; can easily relate to this approach to bibli-
cal narrative. Why? Because they can feel it in their hearts, minds, and spirits. I trust
you can see the value of this approach.

Spring
2010
60
It shows us
Gods way of
finding His
lost things.
Lessons about Pastoral Care
From the Parable of Luke 15

Ronald E. Cobb, D.Min
Associate Professor of Pastoral Care and Biblical Counseling

At first glance Luke 15
1
would appear to contain three parables. Those who grew up in
church can likely recall hearing sermons on the parable of the lost sheep (Luke 15.3-7),
the parable of the lost coin (Luke 15.8-10), and the parable of the prodigal son (Luke
15.11-32). Yet, on closer examination of the entire chapter, we note that Jesus did not
refer to three separate parables, He only spoke of one (Luke 15.3). G. Campbell Mor-
gan eloquently makes this point in the following words:
The answer of Jesus consists of one parable, not three. We generally say three
parables, and there is a sense in which that is quite permissible: the man with
the lost sheep, the woman and the lost silver, and the prodigal son. All such de-
scription is correct if we remember that this is one set address, continuous, con-
secutive, complete. It is therefore really one parable with three facets. The
inclusive truth taught in the parable is that of the place of lost things in the
economy of God: a lost sheep, a lost piece of silver, the lost son. He
showed in the entire parable how God acts in the presence of lost
things. None of them is abandoned. All of them are valuable, and all
of them are sought; and the way of the finding of all is revealed. This
is the supreme value of the whole teaching. It shows us Gods way of
finding His lost things.
2

Luke 15 is a picture of the heart of God and its tender compassion toward
things that are lost. As Christian leaders who serve in the capacity of pastors, church
staff members, missionaries, and leaders of parachurch ministries, we should have the
same heart of God toward those who have lost their way. Doubtless, there will be mani-
fold opportunities for pastoral care in the years ahead because, in the words of Jesus,
In the world you have tribulation (John 16.33b). Unlike the cynical scribes and Phari-
sees who chronically criticized Jesus (Luke 15.2) we, as Christian lay people and minis-

1
All Scripture references in this article will be from the New American Standard Bible (LaHabra,
CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1960) unless otherwise noted.

2
G. Campbell Morgan, The Parable of the Fathers Heart (New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1949),
8.

Spring
2010
61
ters, must meet hurting people where they are with words of grace and hope rather than
with words of judgment and condemnation. We are to demonstrate the same heart of
God displayed in the parable of Luke 15. In this chapter we find at least three lessons
about effective pastoral care.

Lost Sheep Need Pastoral Care (Luke 15.3-7)
Throughout the Bible people, including Gods people, are compared to sheep. Sheep
have no natural defenses, so they are absolutely dependent on the protection offered by
their shepherd. As shepherd-author Philip Keller points out, They (sheep) have little or
no means of self-defense. They are helpless, timid, feeble creatures whose only re-
course is to run.
3
Sheep are not skilled at providing for themselves so they need a
skilled shepherd who can lead them to food and water (Psalm 23.2). Sheep are lacking
in intelligence and thus are prone to wander aimlessly away from the watch care of their
shepherd. God the Father aggressively seeks after lost sheep who have wandered
away from His tender care. Henri Nouwen pens the following words about the heart of
God:
This is the great mystery of our faith. We do not choose God, God chooses us.
God is looking into the distance for me, trying to find me, and longing to bring me
home. It might sound strange, but God wants to find me as much as, if not more
than, I want to find God. I am beginning now to see how radically the character
of my spiritual journey will change when I no longer think of God as hiding out
and making it as difficult as possible for me to find Him, but, instead, as the One
who is looking for me while I am doing the hiding.
4

We who do pastoral care represent Godwe are His ambassadors (2 Corinthians
5.20). We may be the very face of God to those that are lost, dying, and in desperate
need of pastoral care. During His earthly ministry Jesus, the Great Shepherd, grieved
with compassion over the multitudes because they were distressed and downcast like
sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9.36). Like the shepherds of old we must seek to
meet the spiritual, the psychological, and even the physical needs of the hurting and
wandering multitudes today.

3
Philip Keller, A Shepherd Looks at Psalm 23 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970), 36.

4
Henri J. M. Nouwen, The Return of the Prodigal Son (New York: Doubleday, 1994), 105-107.

Spring
2010
62
We live in
a time of
loss.
Those Who Experience Material Loss Need Pastoral Care (Luke 15.8-10)
At first glance the story of the woman and the lost silver may not seem as compelling as
the lost sheep and the lost son. After all, the others are living things, one representing
the very livelihood of its owner and the other a beloved heir. Yet, as Warren Wiersbe
explains, the lost silver had great significance for this dear woman:
When a Jewish girl married, she began to wear a head-band of ten silver coins to
signify that she was now a wife. It was the Jewish version of our modern wed-
ding ring, and it would be considered a calamity for her to lose one of these
coins. Palestinian homes were dark, so she had to light a lamp and search until
she found the lost coin; and we can imagine her joy at finding it.
5

We live in a time of loss. Not a day passes that we are not acutely made aware of our
societys economic woes. Jobs are lost and not easily replaced, for-
tunes are lost and not quickly recovered, and reputations are lost and
never restored. The loss of a precious possession, the loss of socio-
economic status, or the loss of a promising career are devastating
and must never be minimized. It is worthy of note that when the
woman recovered her lost coin, she responded the same way as the
shepherd who recovered his lost sheep, Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin
which I had lost (compare Luke 15.9 and 15.6).

As those who extend pastoral care to hurting people who are daily being impacted by
lifes ups and downs we must stand ready to offer comfort, guidance, and strength to
those experiencing loss and we must be prepared to rejoice with those who recover
from lifes losses. In the words of the apostle Paul, Rejoice with those who rejoice, and
weep with those who weep (Romans 12.15). Perhaps this is part of what it means to
become all things to all men (1 Corinthians 9.22b).
Those Struggling With Profound Loss Need Pastoral Care (Luke 15.11-32)
How unimaginable must be the grief of one who loses a beloved child, regardless of the
circumstances. That loss is further compounded when it occurs as the result of a delib-
erate choice by the child to abandon the relationship. Such is the circumstance of the
grieving father in Luke 15.11-32. His younger son decided that he wanted his inheri-
tance before his fathers death. This was a highly unusual request but not unheard of in
the culture of Jesus day. Hendriksen comments:

5
Warren Wiersbe, Be Courageous (Wheaton, IL: Scripture Press Publications, 1989), 23-24.

Spring
2010
63
He probably knew that according to the law of Deuteronomy 21.17 one-third of
the parental estate would be his when his father died. But he wanted that portion
now. He could not wait. Now it must be granted that a father did at times make
gifts to his children while he was still alive (Genesis 25.6), but this young man
was not satisfied with a mere gift. He wanted his entire portion, and he wanted it
here and now.
6

Once the younger son had his inheritance in hand, he left his family for a distant country
(Luke 15.13). The father was left to wonder about the fate of his son and to face the os-
tracism of a culture in which such an act as that perpetrated by his son was unparalleled
in terms of foolishness and selfishness.

Those who are pastors and Christian workers will doubtless be called upon to minister
to those who have been similarly devastated by the thoughtlessly self-serving behavior
of a loved one. Mike Yaconelli paints a powerful word picture of the fathers grief:
The father has never recovered from the loss of his son. Hurt deeply, he obvi-
ously spends much of his day staring out into the barren, desolate landscape,
mourning the loss of his son. It is a grief that makes each day colorless, a grief
that quickens his eyesight and hearing. Every day he looks for his son, and
every night he listens for his son.
7

Since this extended parable is about the heart of God the Father, we would do well, as
pastoral counselors and Christian ministers, to reveal the Fathers heart to those in dire
need of pastoral care. Our heavenly Father seeks after that which is lost relentlessly,
He deeply cares about the material losses of our life, and he teaches us to place the
profound losses of life into His transforming hands. We teach the hurting soul to relin-
quish control of the circumstances of life into the safe care of a sovereign, merciful, and
loving God. We can be confident that God will work in all things in such a way that
good will be manifested in our lives because we belong to Him (Romans 8.28). The
wise Christian will surrender his possessions, his livelihood, his reputation, his future,
his family, his dreamseverything, into the loving purposes of a God who is for us
(Romans 8: 31). Once the place of surrender is reached we can begin to be like the
shepherd, the woman, and the father of Luke 15we can rejoice (6, 9, and 22-24). Our
rejoicing is not necessarily based on the restoration of that which was lost, our rejoicing

6
William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978), 752-753.

7
Michael Yaconelli, Dangerous Wonder (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 1998), 97-98.

Spring
2010
64
is grounded in the certainty that God is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far
beyond all comparison (2 Corinthians 4.17b).

Ultimately, pastoral care, at its core is sharing about the heart of God the Father with
those who have been battered about by the hard circumstances of life. Pastoral care, in
a profound sense, is being the face and voice of a compassionate God to those who
have all but lost hope. Pastoral care, in essence, is being Jesus with skin on to those
desperate for a loving embrace from the heavenly Father.

Spring
2010
65
The Use of Parables in the Old Testament
H. David Phillips, PhD
Professor of Old Testament and Hebrew

INTRODUCTION

The Old Testament is not fertile ground for parables. This certainly is true in compari-
son to the New Testament where parables are a regular feature of the synoptic gospels.
Yet one should understand that parables convey important truths in the Old Testament
as well as the New Testament.

The word parable comes from the Greek word parabole which is related to parabollo, to
cast or place beside.
1
From the idea of casting beside came the idea of casting or
placing beside for the comparison with something else.
2
The idea of comparison is
clear in that the word like is found in context with the word parable in the parable of the
wheat and tares. Matthew 13:24 reads, Another parable [parable] He put forth to them
saying, The kingdom of heaven is like [emphasis added] a man who sowed good seed
in his field. In a parable, that which is not known is compared to that which is known.
Thus, at the heart of a parable is comparison.

The Old Testament word for parable is mashal whose root idea is like, which is similar
to parabole. The closeness of the two words is seen in that the Septuagint consistently
translates the Hebrew mashal with parabole. The Hebrew word, however, is more
inclusive in meaning. It can mean proverb, parable, allegory, byword, taunt, and
discourse.
3
Interesting, it is not used in the Old Testament to introduce a parable in the
restrictive sense.

1
A Greek-Hebrew Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3d ed.,
parabole.

2
Henry A. Virkler, Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rap-
ids: Baker Book House, 1981), 162-63.

3
Victor P. Hamilton, , in Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.


Spring
2010
66
Parable Explained

A parable is an extended or continued simile.
4
Sometimes there is difficulty in determin-
ing whether a particular Scripture should be considered a simile or a parable. This is
not surprising since with respect to length no fine line distinguishing the two has been
drawn. Indeed, C. H. Dodd in discussing figurative sayings, similitudes, and parables
recognized this problem: It cannot be pretended that the line can be drawn between
these three classes of parable.
5
Sometimes, the question concerning whether a story
is a parable as opposed to a simple simile is in the eye of the beholder. The difficulty
of this question is demonstrated by the differing views of the number of the parables of
Jesus; the number ranging from about thirty to about sixty. Some have a wider view of
what constitutes a parable than do others.

A parable is a literal story or at least is presented as such. While none of the stories
can be linked to a real life event, the events of the story are easily recognizable as
events that could very well have occurred. E. W. Bullinger stated as much, saying that
a parable is a story may be true or imaginary; but the events must be possible, or likely
to have happened; at any rate those who hear must believe that they are possible
events, though it is not necessary that the speaker should believe them.
6
The verbs in
parables are in the past tense since the parable relates a past event.
Parable Differentiated from a Similitude
A parable should be distinguished from a similitude. A similitude is a simile in which
comparison is based on a well-known truth. It is not presented in Scripture as a histori-
cal event. The verbs used are present tense since they express a characteristic of
something. On the other hand, a parable is a literal event, or at least it is so presented.
Archibald M. Hunter explained the difference: The difference between a similitude and
a story-parable is this: whereas the similitude bases itself on some familiar truth or
process (like putting a patch on a garment or leaven into meal), the story-parable de-
scribes not what men commonly do but what one man did. A sower went out to sow.

4
Herbert Lockyer, All the Parables of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,
1963), 12, 16.

5
C. H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, 2d ed. (New York: Scribner, [1961]), 18.

6
E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode,
1898; reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1968), 752.


Spring
2010
67
A certain man made a great supper. Thus, similitudes should be rejected as true par-
ables.
Wider View of Parables Rejected
Some commentators hold to what might be called a wider view of parables. H. L. Wil-
mington was one. He defined parable as a placing beside or comparison of earthly
truths with heavenly truths. It is an earthly story, often historical in nature, but not nec-
essarily so, with a heavenly meaning.
7
This led him to discover a large number of par-
ables in the Old Testament. Herbert Lockyer in his exhaustive treatment of the biblical
parables follows this wider view after first suggesting a more restrictive view of the
number of Old Testament parables.
8

A brief consideration of the wider parables demonstrates that they are not true parables,
at least in the sense of the parables of Christ. In all of these supposed parables, there
is no literal, historical story used by a speaker to illustrate his message. For instance,
the story of the marred girdle of Jeremiah 13:1-11 is sometimes identified as a parable.
9

In it, God instructed Jeremiah to take his linen girdle to the Euphrates River and bury it.
Later God instructed him to retrieve the girdle which, having been in contact with the
earth, was degraded. The purpose was to demonstrate that the unfaithfulness of Gods
people had rendered them unfit to serve God according to His purpose even as the cor-
rupted girdle had lost its functionality. This story was not told as historical story. As
given to Jeremiah, it was prospective. Therefore, itand others like itshould be re-
jected as a parable.

Another wider parable, given by some, is the harlot wife of Hosea (Hos 1-3).
10
In the
story God commanded Hosea to take a wife of harlotry. It was historical only in the
sense that it was later fulfilled, but it was the telling of a historical story in a prophetic
message. It was the message. In addition to not being a historical story, it was given
to the prophet Hosea only. It was not used at the time as an illustration in a message to
an audience. It is only related much later when Hosea wrote his book. Even then, it is

7
H. L. Wilmington, The Complete Book of Bible Lists (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers),
225.

8
Lockyer, All the Parables of the Bible, 11-12, 27-122.

9
See, for instance, Wilmington, The Complete Book of Bible Lists, 225.

10
Ibid., 226.


Spring
2010
68
A parable is used
in much the same
way as a preacher
might do in illus-
trating a point in
his sermon with a
poignant story.
not an illustration, but a report of Gods command to Hosea. This, of
course, is not to discount the story in any way, but simply to point
out that it is not a parable.

Some consider the story of the trees in Judges 9:7-15 to be a
parable, but it is a fable.
11
In the story the trees asked first for
the olive tree to rule over them; then they asked the fig tree and
the vine. Each in turn refused the proffered kingdom. Finally,
the trees asked the bramble bush which readily agreed to be their
ruler. The trees were symbolic of the people; the olive tree, the fig
tree, and the vine were symbolic of Gideon and his good sons. The
bramble bush represented the less than worthless Abimelech. Bullinger dismissed the
story as a parable, saying that where trees or animals [speak] or [reason], we have Fa-
ble.
12
Rightfully, the story is a fable.

Purpose of a Parable

The purpose of a parable is to illustrate one point of a speech or message. A parable is
used in much the same way as a preacher might do in illustrating a point in his sermon
with a poignant story. As such, it illustrates one point. Details of a parable should not
be pressed. Bullinger stated succinctly: This likeness is generally only in some special
point. One person may be like another in appearance, but not in character, and vice
versa; so that when resemblance or likeness is affirmed it is not to be concluded that
the likeness may be pressed in all points, or extended to all particulars.
13
Moreover, he
added, The resemblance is to be sought for in the scope of the context, and in the one
great truth which is presented, and the one important lesson which is taught; and not in
all the minute details which these happen to be associated.
14
The wisdom of not press-
ing the details of parables is shown by the allegorizing of the parables during the Middle
Age and even until the time of Archbishop Trench.
15
The result, of course, was interpre-
tations that had little, if any, relation to their context. Augustines interpretation of the

11
See, for instance, Wilmington, The Complete Book of Bible Lists, 225.

12
Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 752.

13
Ibid., 751.

14
Ibid., 752.

15
Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, 13.


Spring
2010
69
parable of the good Samaritan is a good example of allegorical interpretation. His inter-
pretation was clearly outside the plain teaching of the parable.
16
His interpretation of
the details of the parable is arbitrary and contrary to the intent of the parable. For in-
stance, Jericho means the moon, and the inn is the church.
17

Moreover, some find more than one major teaching in parables.
18
This should be re-
jected because a speaker uses an illustration to clarify one point in his message. This
is not to deny that there are no minor points. Details, however, contribute to the major
teachings. They are not major teachings. The major teaching of a parable can also be
found in the parables context as well as the parable itself: that is, what the speaker
says before or after the parable.

In summation, a parable illustrates one point. It is or is perceived to be a historical
event. It is part of a speech which is given to an audience by a speaker. According to
this restrictive view, there are only five stories in the Old Testament that can be consid-
ered parables. The first Old Testament parable is the parable of the ewe lamb in 2
Samuel 12:1-4. The context of the parable is Davids failure to repent of his adultery
with Bathsheba and the subsequent murder of Uriah, her husband. God sent Nathan to
confront David (v. 1). Rather than directly confronting David, Nathan related a story of a
rich man who, in order to entertain, a traveler took the only lamb of a poor man. This
he did instead of taking an animal from his flocks and herds (v. 2).

David was justifiably moved. Likely, David, having been a shepherd, disdained this ac-
tion even more. Consequently, he demanded that the perpetrator be punished. After
David was sufficiently enraged, Nathan sprang the trap. At that point David recognized
that he was the rich man in the story. He had unwittingly condemned himself. To
Davids credit, however, he repented (v. 13; Ps 51). David was a great sinner, but he
was a greater repenter.

The purpose of the parable was to bring David to repentance. The context implies that
David could not bring himself to ask for Gods forgiveness. Through the simple story,
David was brought to see his sin through the eyes of God and then to repent. If Nathan

16
Ibid., 11-12.

17
Ibid.

18
See, for instance, Craig L. Blomberg (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1990), 171 ff.

Spring
2010
70
had attempted to confront David directly, David would likely have been defensive and
less likely to repent.

One marvels at the genius of the parable: a recalcitrant king, resolved not to repent,
was brought to repentance by such a simple story. The persuasive power of the par-
able was marvelous, if not miraculous.

The second parable is the parable of two sons in 2 Samuel 14:1-24. The context of this
parable is Davids yearning for the return of his rebellious son, Absalom. David was
conflicted. Though he longed for Absalom, as king David was duty bound to judge his
wayward son. With respect to this problem, Joab devised a plan. He recruited a
woman to act out the part of a widow with a sad story about her two sons. In short, her
two sons fought one another with one son killing the other. While she sought to save
his life, her family sought to kill him. Although the story was fabricated by Joab, David
bought the story and ordered that the remaining son be protected. Soon afterward,
David realized that Joab had been the instigator of the event. Although David had been
deceived, David was moved to bring Absalom back.

The purpose of the parable was to relieve Davids inner conflict so that he could rule Is-
rael properly. The incident caused David to confront the problem of Absaloms ab-
sence. Joab probably had a personal reason. The character of Joab was such that he
seems never to have done anything that in some way did not benefit him. The benefit
may have been only that Joab was tired of the weak rule of David because of his long-
ing for Absalom. Although the purpose is not stated in the text, it is a reasonable con-
clusion.

The parable of the two sons does not rise to the level of the first parable of the ewe
lamb. No doubt, it was convincing. Yet it was fraught with falsehood. The widow was
not who she claimed to be; the story was false also.

The third parable is that of the wounded prophet in 1 Kings 20:35-43. In this parable an
unnamed prophet related a story to King Ahab to illustrate the kings lack of faithfulness
in disposing of Benhadad the Syrian king. First, the prophet had a man smite him to
suggest that he had been in battle. Then he put ashes on his face to hide his identity
from the king. When the king passed by the actor prophet, the prophet told the king a
fictitious account of his being asked by another soldierapparently of higher rankto
guard a prisoner. Moreover, if he were to fail to keep captive the prisoner, he was to

Spring
2010
71
have his life taken as punishment or pay a talent of silver. In the prophets account, the
prisoner escaped.
Upon hearing the story, King Ahab condemned the prophet to suffer the consequence
of his negligence: So shall thy judgment be; thyself hast decided it (v.40). When the
prophet revealed himself to the king, the king recognized that he was the guard in the
story and that Benhadad was the escaped captive. King Ahab had condemned himself.
Recognizing this he went away sullen.

The purpose of the parable was to confront King Ahab for not judging Benhadad and
allowing him to return to his country after the Syrians had been defeated (1 Kgs 20:23-
30). The parable allowed the prophet to breach the reluctance of King Ahab to hear a
prophets condemnation. That the prophet had to disguise himself shows this reluc-
tance. The truth of the parable was well understood by Ahab, but it was for naught as
Ahab demonstrated no repentance.

In this parable the prophet related a fictitious story. Like the first two parables, it was an
attempt to deceive the hearer. Unlike them, the parable did not fulfill its purpose. Ahab
certainly understood the parable, but rejected it. He was personally moved, though not
positively.

The fourth parable is the parable of the vineyard in Isaiah 5:1-6. In this parable the
prophet Isaiah told the story of a farmer who followed all of the proper procedures in or-
der for his vineyard to produce sweet grapes. Yet the vineyard produced sour grapes.

The purpose of the parable is to illustrate the faithfulness of God to direct His people
spiritually to produce the sweet fruits of salvation. He did everything that could be done
to this end, but to no avail; Judah was unfaithful and unproductive.

The parable would have been easy for the hearers to understand. The country was
agrarian. As such, the connection of good farming techniques and production was well
understood. Although natural disasters might damage--even destroy--a crop, good
farming methods would under normal conditions assure a good crop, that is, sweet
grapes. Yet this was not true of Gods people. To Isaiah this was an enigma which was
contrary to what was to be expected. The people were properly nurtured by God and
should have been a righteous people; yet the opposite was true.

Spring
2010
72
This parable was doubtlessly understood by the hearers since Isaiah explained it in
verses 3-6. No doubt also, it was rejected as Judah fulfilled Isaiahs prophecy of exile
that was alluded to in the parables explanation (vv. 5-7).

The fifth parable is the parable of the little city in Ecclesiastes 9:13-18. The value of
wisdom is emphasized in this parable. The setting is a little city which was being
threatened by an enemy king. Neither the city nor the king is identified. By the wisdom
of a poor man, the city was delivered. Yet no one had remembered the poor man of
the city because his poverty made his wisdom suspect. The conquering king, however,
found him, and was impressed by the wisdom of the poor wise man and spared the
little city. The text only indicates that the city was spared on account of his wisdom; it
does not spell out his way of doing so. The parable teaches that wisdom is superior to
strength (v. 16).
19

CONCLUSION
There are but five true Old Testament parables. Three of them are used to deceive the
hearer. Even the parable of the ewe lamb that Nathan so eloquently delivered to David
was deceptive. The parables of the two sons and of the wounded prophet are similar in
that they are deceptive, but without the eloquence display by Nathan. These three par-
ables do not fully measure up to the standard of Christs parables.

Only the parable of the poor wise man and the parable of the vineyard are used as illus-
trations in a positive sense. Of these two, the parable of the vineyard comes closest to
Jesus use of parables. The parable of the poor wise man is apparently a story in a writ-
ten discourse and was never delivered to a live audience. This is not to say that it was
lacking as a parable but only to suggest that it did not meet fully the model of Christs

19
Some have objected to the translation of the AV which translates no one remembered con-
tending that the translation does not fit the context. In particular, verse 16 says that his wisdom was de-
spised which would not make sense according to the translation of the AV (no one remembered). His
wisdom would have been celebrated, not despised. Those who have objected to this translation have
proposed the translation no one might/could remember, meaning that he did not actually deliver the city
because he was despised and not called upon to do so. The Hebrew word for delivered is in the perfect
state, however, which does not lend itself to being translated as a subjunctive. The subjunctive is ex-
pressed by the verb in the imperfect state. A better translation which is allowed by the perfect state is no
one had remembered. That is, the poor man was not remembered until the time it was needed. Until
that time he was despised. See H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Ecclesiastes (Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1952), 224.


Spring
2010
73
parables. Isaiahs parable was probably given as part of a sermon, so it most closely
follows the model of the parables of Christ.

Spring
2010
74
Parables and Pedagogy
Marcia Bost, MEd
Adjunct Professor of English

I am always a little amused when secular researchers think theyve discovered the con-
cepts that the Bible has already revealed. A case in point is the recent highlighting of
the value of storytelling in pedagogy, or the theory of education. Following the example
of the Master teacher himself, Christians have long realized the value of stories. Since
Jesus Christ used parables, Christians have never strayed far from that method of
teaching. Secular education, however, spent half a century focused on the hands-on
learning methods advocated by John Dewey. In the 1980s a few educators began to
write about the value of telling stories within the classroom. This article will focus on the
connection of parables and stories, the value of stories within education and the possi-
ble use of stories as a means to bring Christ back into education, whether formal or in-
formal.
Relation of Parables and Stories

Parables are of course brief stories, but a particular kind of story that teaches a lesson.
In his article, Dr. Cocar has explored the biblical context of parables. I will add only this
description:

A parable is a fictitious or made up story designed to teach a lesson through
comparison. When you hear the story, you can relate it to your own life. It is like
an illustration for the points in a sermon. It conveys its message of truth through
analogy, through comparison or contrast. . . . The power of a parable comes from
the fact that you recognize that thats the way it is in real life.
1

A parable is thus a fictional story whose value is that it illustrates truth.

Truth in Stories

However, can truth be conveyed even through fictional or made up stories? The impor-
tance of the story, as Chuck Colson writes
2
, lies not in the factual representation of real-

1
Hampton Keathley IV, Introduction to the Parables, Bible.org website,
http://bible.org/seriespage/introduction-parables (accessed Nov. 8, 2009).

2
Colson, Chuck, Criticize by Creating: Art Within. Pub. Sept. 25, 2002.
http://www.breakpoint.org/commentaries/3020-criticize-by-creating (Accessed Oct. 7, 2009).

Spring
2010
75
ity but in the truth of the concepts conveyed. Also, fables have often been used to teach
such truths. Marni Gillard, a teacher who became a professional storyteller, also points
to this use, noting that these stories about animals exposed human predicaments and
foibles yet spoke a useful truth.
3

In addition to fables, other fictional works such as novels can teach concepts. Tim Win-
ton, an Australian Christian writer, muses about his craft in an interview:

Stories are fundamental to humans; theyre meat and potatoes. They have the
capacity to shift our furniture. In the case of novels, we know were reading
something that is not real, yet we can finish it with the conviction that it has been
true. A good novel leaves the reader with a sense of unfinished business, a lin-
gering provocation.
4

Thus, concepts and even truths can be expressed through fictional stories.

Judeo-Christian and Other Traditions

Because the Jewish tradition has a particular link with contemporary storytelling, several
Jewish storytellers have given their perspectives. One example is Pininnah Schram,
storyteller and author, who describes the link between the Bible and stories:

The Jews have always loved and told stories. The rabbis understood the impor-
tance of story in teaching and transmitting values and traditions. A story is a
beautiful means of teaching religion, values, history, traditions, and customs: a
creative method of introducing characters and places; an imaginative way to in-
still hope and resourceful thinking. Stories help us understand who we are and
show us what legacies to transmit to future generations.
5

3
Marni Gillard,Storyteller, Story Teacher: Discovering the Power of Storytelling for Teaching and
Living. (York, MA: Stenhouse Publishers, 1966), 89.

4
Paul Mitchell, Not Real but True: Tim Winston and the Spirit of Fiction, Breakpoint Website,
published 14 April 2008. http://www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/articles/1188-not-real-but-true (Ac-
cessed Oct. 7, 2009), 5-6.
5
Peninnah Schram. Collections from the People of the Story. In The National Storytelling Asso-
ciation. Tales as Tools: The Power of Story in the Classroom. (Jonesborough, TN: The National Storytel-
ling Press, 1994), 176-178.

Spring
2010
76
Story is a mys-
tery that has
the power to
reach within
each of us
Thus, Jews, as well as Christians, have always appreciated the effectiveness of story-
telling.

In addition to our ultimate model in the Lord Jesus Christ, Christians have another moti-
vation for using stories in teaching: creating out of our position as children of the Crea-
tor. C.S. Lewis writes about this insight which he attributes to his friend R. J. Tolkien:

The appeal of the fairy story lies in the fact that man there most fully exercises
his function as a subcreator: not as they love to say now, making a comment
upon life but making, so far as possible, a subordinate world of his own. Since, in
Tolkiens view, this is one of its functions, delight naturally arises whenever it is
successfully performed. For Jung, fairy tale liberates Archetypes which dwell in
the collective unconscious, and when we read a good fairy tale we are obeying
the old precept Know thyself.
6

However, the use of storytelling is not confined to the Judeo-
Christian tradition, but is widespread among many cultures of
the world. The transcultural dimension of stories is highlighted
by Norma J. Livo and Sandra A. Rietz, traditional storytellers,
who in their in-depth volume on storytelling make this com-
ment:

Story is a mystery that has the power to reach within each of us, to command
emotion, to compel involvement, and to transport us into timelessness. Story is
a structural abstraction perhaps built into human memory, a way of thinking, a
primary organizer of information and ideas, the soul of a culture, and the mythic
and metaphoric consciousness of a people.
7

They further claim that storytelling began soon after the acquisition of oral language
8

and give examples of storytelling from cultures as diverse as Ireland, Russia, and the
Skagit peoples from Seattle, Washington.

6
C.S. Lewis. On Three Ways of Writing for Children in Of Other Worlds: Essays and Stories.
Walter Hooper, ed. (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World Inc., 1966), 27.
7
Livo, N.J. & Rietz. S.A. Storytelling: Process and Practice. (Littleton, CO: Libraries Unlimited,
1986), 2.

8
For biblical creationists, of course, that would mean from the beginning of the human race,
though that is not what the cited authors meant.

Spring
2010
77
Other secular educators also recognize the universality of stories and storytelling. For
example, Sarah Malone, a school counselor, comments:

Storytelling has been an important communication tool from time immemorial, its
power laying partly in this history. It is, in the Jungian sense, archetypalso in-
trinsic to the human condition that it resides, to quote a Spanish expression, in
the bone marrow (en la medulla).
9

Thus, the storytellers and educators both testify to the universal status of stories and
storytelling.

The Value of Using Stories in Education

Chuck Colson also points out the value of stories and their close relation to parables,
noting, moral propositions are absorbed much more easily through images and the
medium of storytelling than through dry, theological treatises. He reminds us that sto-
ries both express and shape our beliefs and values. Colson also describes how Jesus
made an effective use of stories:

He could have simply said, "Take care of people who are hurt and victimized."
Instead, He spun the tale of the Good Samaritan. He could have just said, "God
forgives your sins, so forgive others." Instead, He told the parable of the unmerci-
ful servant. Why? Because a story gets at aspects of truth that are beyond the
power of didactic teaching.
10

The effectiveness of stories in the form of fables (a second cousin to parables) is also
acknowledged by secular educators. Gillard comments that she was drawn to by fables
as a child. Many fables reminded me of myself in some way, and the caution they of-
fered was more palatable than the advice offered directly by parents and teachers. To
this day, a story-based sermon is more likely to linger with me than a lecture.
11
She

9
Sarah Malone. Therapeutic Storytelling in the School Setting. In The National Storytelling As-
sociation. Tales as Tools: The Power of Story in the Classroom. (Jonesborough, TN: The National Story-
telling Press, 1994), 149.

10
Colson, Chuck, Criticize by Creating: Art within. Pub. Sept. 25, 2002.
http://www.breakpoint.org/commentaries/3020-criticize-by-creating (Accessed Oct. 7, 2009).

11
Gillard, 90.

Spring
2010
78
Oral storytelling
should be the
heart of the
curriculum.
also states that even personal tales can contain a fable, a moral that can be discov-
ered.
12
Thus, stories whether they are categorized as parables, fables, or novels, con-
vey concepts in ways that other genres cannot.

Furthermore, stories are the unacknowledged center of education, according to some
educators. Vivian Gussin Paley, an award winning author and kindergarten teacher,
stated in an interview:

This [the incorporation of concepts] is what education is all about, is it not, and
where do we get it from? Story. It is story that enables us to see things on many
levels. It is the original scientific thinking. Cause and effect. Many approaches.
Many prisms through which you view a single event.
13

Paley also points out that learning through stories takes place at
all educational levels, even in college.

Other educators have come to realize the educational
benefits of stories and storytelling in the classroom. Betty D.
Roe, et. al., gives the educational reasons for using stories in
K-12 classrooms, including the need to develop all five language
skills: listening, speaking, reading, writing, and thinking. Sharon Dailey in
the introduction to Tales as Tools states that the storyteller also teaches in many com-
munities. She adds, That role is rooted in the almost instinctive understanding that real
learning takes place when both intellect and emotions are brought into play. We re-
member those things we care deeply about, and we understand those things we can
see clearly.
14
In addition to the teacher acting as a storyteller, Mark Wagler recom-
mends making oral storytelling the heart of the curriculum.

Teaching with narrative processes allows us to place images before ideas, hear
the fragments of personal stories that are as pervasive as air, harmonize dispa-
rate subjects in integrated learning, accept childrens experience as the key to

12
Ibid, 91-92.

13
Marge Cunningham, The Moral of the Story. In The National Storytelling Association. Tales as
Tools: The Power of Story in the Classroom. (Jonesborough, TN: The National Storytelling Press,
1994),12.

14
Sharon Dailey, Introduction, In The National Storytelling Association. Tales as Tools: The
Power of Story in the Classroom. (Jonesborough, TN: The National Storytelling Press, 1994),2.


Spring
2010
79
learning instead of a distraction from the concepts they are supposed to learn,
and use narrative not only to study literature but also to explore every category
of experience.
15

Setting aside the conventional objective-driven lesson plan, Kieran Egan, a professor of
education, even recommends using the concept of storytelling as an organizing princi-
ple for lesson planning. A major point of this book is that teaching is centrally con-
cerned with efficiently organizing and communicating meaning, and so we will sensibly
use a planning model derived from one of the worlds most powerful and pervasive
ways of doing this.
16
The planning model that he recommends is asking the question,
Whats the story here? So, stories and storytelling can have a major impact in the
learning that takes place within our classrooms.

Storytelling As a Way To Reach Non-Christians

Outside of the classroom stories and storytelling may even be the only way to reach
non-Christians today. Colson tells the tale of an encounter with a famous movie pro-
ducer. As he talks with this man, neither his personal testimony nor the authority of the
Bible breaks through the mans defenses. Only when he points to the modern dilemma
of conscience in Woody Allens Crimes and Misdemeanors does Colson get the mans
attention.
17
Thus, a story is the means of gaining a hearing for the gospel. Colson con-
cludes, Modern America used to resemble Jerusalem, but it is becoming increasingly
like Athens. It is our taskin the post Christian 1990sto utilize contemporary culture
as a tool to introduce the message of salvation.
18
The post Christian trends Colson
spotted in the 1990s have only become more pronounced, making stories even more of
a necessary tool to reach those outside the community of faith.

15
Mark Wagler. Jailbreak! Storytelling in Room 103. In The National Storytelling Association,
Tales as Tools: The Power of Story in the Classroom. (Jonesborough, TN: The National Storytelling
Press, 1994), 22.

16
Kieran Egan, Teaching as Story Telling: an Alternative Approach to Teaching and Curriculum in
the Elementary School(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1986), 38.

17
Colson, Chuck. A Tale of Two Cities: Apologetics for a Post-Christian World. Breakpoint Web
site. Published August 7, 1997. http://www.breakpoint.org/commentaries/4678-a-tale-of-two-cities ac-
cessed Oct. 7, 2009

18
Ibid.


Spring
2010
80
Part of the storytelling in this culture is of course film. Two BreakPoint authors write
about a vision of Christians in Hollywood. Gina Dalfonzo shares this comment:

Storytelling is the way human beings learn. It is the way we define our values. It
gives us heroes and noble dreams. Entertainment is the way we stretch our-
selves beyond the limits of our work a day world to experience the depth of our
human nature. Our entertainment should lead us to laugh hard and to cry with
empathy and to feel exhilaration and wonder.
19

Alex Wainer also suggests that movies, television and other media can be cinematic
parables that can take us out of ourselves for a while and bring us back with a glimpse
of something true, with a smile, or a tear, or both.
20
Not all movies will become a par-
able, however, as noted by reviewers Gardner and Kerr. The movie Pretty Baby, which
they reviewed, certainly did not have that value.
21

Indeed, Christians should proceed with caution when trying to use stories. As Winton
comments,

A novel isnt a very good rhetorical tool. It poses better questions than an-
swers. The novels with the most polemic, the most bald-face attempts to per-
suade, are those the reader turns away from most quickly, so instinctively.
You really have to bend a story out of shape to fulfill an ideological mission.
The shape becomes inhuman, inauthentic. Art contains argument, but in the
end art cannot usually be contained by argument.
22

19
Dalfonzo, Gina A Vision for Christians in Hollywood. August 11,
2008http://www.breakpoint.org/tp-home/blog-archives/7446-a-vision-for-christians-in-hollywood (Ac-
cessed Oct 7, 2009).

20
Wainer, Alex. Are you not Entertained? What it takes to Deliver to Audiences. June 1, 2007.
http://www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/articles/1441-are-you-not-entertained (Accessed Oct. 7,
2009).

21
Gardner, Freda and Hugh T. Kerr. Notes from Pretty Baby a Film Critique. Theology Today
35, no 3, (October 1978) Critics Corner. http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/oct1978/v35-3-criticscorner4.htm
p. 333 (Accessed Sept. 10, 2009).

22
Mitchell, 3.


Spring
2010
81
C. S. Lewis notes: On that side (as an Author) I wrote fairy tales because Fairy Tales
seemed the ideal form for the stuff I had to say.
23
He goes on to say that recasting the
Christian truths into an imaginary world, stripping them of their stained-glass and Sun-
day school associations could enable Christians in the middle of the twentieth century
to regain the real potency of those truths.
24
Lewis states that he always started with an
image, instead of a doctrine or moral. He cautions that

the idea that really matters becomes lost or blunted as the story gets underway. I
must now add that there is a perpetual danger of this happening in all stories. To
be stories at all they must be a series of events: but it must be understood that
this seriesthe plot, as we call itis only really a net whereby to catch some-
thing else. The real theme may be, and perhaps usually is, something that has
no sequence in it, something other than a process and much more like a state or
quality.
25

He states, The story itself should force its moral upon you. You find out what the moral
is by writing the story.
26
Christian writers who wish to reach the disbelieving world must
therefore be careful not to sermonize, but to let the story itself reveal its concepts to the
reader.

CONCLUSION

In summary, stories (whether categorized as parables, fables, novels or films) can con-
vey concepts difficult to explain by other methods. Widely used in different cultures and
times, stories are thought by some to be effective because they make use of the way
our brains are wired. Their long acceptance makes them an effective tool for reaching
across boundaries. Inside and outside the classroom, stories can be powerful tools for
teaching, tools that can break down the barriers erected by postmodern disbelief. Chris-
tians are uniquely poised to tell stories since the Bible itself tells many sacred stories of
Gods pursuit of man. This may be the moment for Christians to tell their stories in lively
and convincing ways.

23
C. S. Lewis, Sometimes Fairy Stories May Say Best Whats to Be Said, On Stories and Other
Essays on Literature. (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1982), 47.

24
Ibid.

25
Ibid, 17.

26
Ibid, 145.

Spring
2010
82

The Surety of the Resurrection of Christ
And Those Who Are in Him

By Steven L. Cox, Ph.D.
Research Professor of Greek and New Testament
Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary
Cordova, TN

The glory and Divinity of Jesus Christ is demonstrated through the resurrection and its
ramifications upon believers. John MacArthur affirmed, The resurrection is the pivot on
which all of Christianity turns and without which none of the other truths would much
matter.
1
Due to the nature of this article, a consideration of the meaning and use of
egeir and anistmi/anastasis is essential, from the Septuagint and the New Testament,
with a focus of the use of these words in the Pauline corpus. The first section will be a
word study of inflected forms of egeir and anistmi/anastasis. Inflected forms of egeir
occur in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8; however, cognates of both verbal forms do occur in sub-
sequent passages of 1 Corinthians 15. The second section will discuss the role of the
doctrine of resurrection of Christ in the kerygma. Christs resurrection is the central part
of apostolic preaching. The third section will discuss the resurrection appearances that
Paul listed in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8. Though 1 Corinthians 15:1-8 is the focus of this arti-
cle, the accounts of resurrection appearances not listed in this text will also be dis-
cussed. The fourth and final section will list references pertaining to the resurrection by
non-canonical sources such as Josephus, Tacitus, Seutonius, Pliny, and Lucian. A con-
clusion will follow the body of this article.

Word Studies of egeir and anistmi/anastasis

The doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is is referred to explicitly
in seventeen books of the New Testament and is implicit in most of the remaining ten.
Nearly all of the letters within the Pauline corpus refer to it (the exceptions are 2 Thess,
Titus, Philem).
2
Inflected forms of the verb anistmi (raise up) occur only five times in

1
John MacArthur, 1 Corinthians (Chicago: Chicago, 1984), 398.

2
G. F. Hawthorne, R. P. Martin, and D. G. Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993), s.v., Resurrection, by L. J.
Kreitzer.

Spring
2010
83
the New Testament, with reference to the resurrection, both of Christ (1 Thess 4:14;
Rom 15:12) and of the believer (1 Thess 4:16; Eph 5:14). Thayer defined anistmi in
two sections. The first is a raising up or rising as from a seat; whereas, the second is
a rising from the dead.
3
Paul used inflected forms of anastasis four times in 1 Corin-
thians 15 (1 Cor 15:12, 13, 21, 42) and no occurrence of this word appeared in 1 Corin-
thians 15:1-8.

Paul also used inflected forms of the verb egeir (I raise up) eight times in this same
chapter (1 Cor 15:4, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, 52) with one occurrence in our text of study.
The inflected verbal form eggertai, in 1 Corinthians 15:4, is a perfect passive indicative
third singular form from egeir.
4
L. Coenen suggested,
that egeir, especially in the pass[ive] is used predominantly for what happened
at Easter, i.e. the wakening of the Crucified to life, while anistmi and anastasis
refer more specifically to the recall to life of people during the earthly ministry of
Jesus and to the eschatological and universal resurrection.
5

This verb has two general uses with contextual variations according to each of the two
general uses. The first use is that with the active voice in which egeir is translated
wake, rouse.
6
Within specific uses of egeir in the first classification a variety of uses
may be found: [the waking] of sleeping persons (Mt 8:25; Acts 12:7); raise, help to
rise of a pers[on] sitting down or lying down" (Acts 3:7; Mk 1:31; 9:27); lift up [as used
in Josephus], . . . Bell. [Jewish Wars] 5.471 speaks in the pass[ing] of the dust that is
raised; raise up, erect, restore of buildings [as in] Dio Chrys[ostom] 11[12], 18; in a
figurative sense raise up, bring into being ([LXX] Jgs 2:16, 18; Mt 3:9; Lk 3:8); and in

3
Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1977), 41-42.

4
The verb egeir (raise, cause to rise) appears thirty-eight times in the New Testament with
reference to the resurrection (Rom 4:24, 25; 6:4, 9; 7:4; 8:11 (twice), 34; 10:9; 13:11; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4,
12, 13, 14, 15 (twice), 16 (twice), 17, 20, 29, 32, 35, 42, 43 (twice), 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14 (twice); 5:15; Gal
1:1; Eph 1:20; 5:14; Col 2:12; 1 Thess 1:10; 2 Tim 2:8.
5
Colin Brown, ed., Dictionary of New Testament Theology, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1986), s.v., Resurrection, by L Coenen.

6
Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Litera-
ture, third edition, revised and edited by Frederick Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000),
s.v., egeir. Please note that all materials from footnote 6 through footnote 9 in quotation marks refer to
comes from this same source.

Spring
2010
84
the imperative mood get up!, come! (Mt 9:5f; Mk 2:9, 11; 3:3; 10:49; Lk 5:23f; 6:8; Jn
5:8; Rv 11:1).
7

The second use is that with the passive voice in which egeir is translated wake up,
awaken fr[om] sleep.
8
Within specific occurrences of egeir in the first classification a
variety of uses may be found: "awaken fr[om] sleep (that is, thoughtless indolence) Rom
13:11 (compare with Epictetus 2. 20.15, . . . fr[om] the sleep of carelessness); rise, get
up of those who have awakened (Mt 2:13f, 20f; 8:26; Lk 11:8); who were sitting down
(Mt 9:19; Lk 13:25; Jn 11:29; of the sick (Mt 8:15; 9:7); "of those called back to life" (2
Kgs 4:31) Mt 9:25; Lk 7:14; Jn 13:4); of one who has fallen (Acts 9:8); be raised, rise
(Is 26:19; compare 2 Kgs 4:31), examples of one who has died" (Lk 16:30, but
esp[ecially] of Christ being raised from the dead] (Mk 6:14; Lk 9:7; Jn 2:22; 21:14;
Rom 6:4, 9; 8:34; 1 Cor 15:12, 20; 2 Tm 2:8); of nations rising in arms (Jer 6:22); and
rising or appearance of prophets (Mt 1:11; Lk16; Jn 7:52); appearance or rising of
false prophets (Mt 24:11, 24; Mk 13:22); appearance or rising of accusers in court" (Mt
12:42; Lk 11:31); or get up! let us be going (Mt 26:46; Mk 14:42; Jn 14:31).
9

The Resurrection in the Primitive Kerygma

MacArthur recognized the centrality of the resurrection of Christ in His teachings:
He [Jesus] taught His disciples that the Son of Man must suffer many things and
be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and
after three days rise again (Mk 8:31; cf. 9:9, 31). He said, I am the resurrection
and the life; he who believes in Me shall live even if he dies (Jn 11:25).
10

The focus on the resurrection of Christ continued in the apostolic preaching and teach-
ings.

The book of Acts records four sermons which contain the same basic kerygmatic out-
line. The death and resurrection of Christ are the centerpieces of this great message.
Birger Gerhardsson noted, Crucifixion was the same as annihilation: the criminal was
not only tortured and liquidated, he was also crushed socially, in maximum disgrace.
11

7
Ibid.

8
Ibid.

9
Ibid.

10
MacArthur, 398.


Spring
2010
85
For physical death
is one of the evils
countered and over-
come by Christs
resurrection.
--Millard J.
Erickson
The first example of this message is found in Acts 2:22-38 with the sketch of Peters
sermon:

a. Jesus lived on earth and did good deeds--historical (Acts 2:22)
b. He was crucified--historical (Acts 2:23-24)
c. God raised him from the dead--historical (Acts 2:29)
d. He fulfilled the Scriptures--historical (Acts 2:34-35)
e. People must repent and believe in Him for salvation--historical/spiritual (Acts
2:36-38)
f. Converts will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit--
historical/spiritual (Acts 2:38).

MacArthur noted, At Pentecost Peter quoted from
Psalm 16 and then commented that David, the author
of the Psalm, looked ahead and spoke of the
resurrection of the Christ, that He was neither
abandoned to Hades, nor did His flesh suffer decay
(Acts 2:2531).
12

Acts 4:1-20 is an account of Peters defense which was
marked by a fresh in-filling with the Holy Spirit. This was a
fulfillment of Jesus words: dont plan your defense ahead of time (Lk 21:14-15). The
main defense was the lame man now is standing and he is healthy. Note that Peter
used the same outline as in Acts 2:22-38. Likewise in Acts 10:34-43 Peter preached to
Cornelius, a God-fearer, and his household. The opening words show a tremendous
breakthrough for Peter in that God does not show partiality with regard to Jew or Gen-
tile. Acts 10:34-43 contains the same kerygmatic outline.

The kerygmatic outline in Acts is not limited to Peter, for Paul used this same outline in
Acts 13:16-52. Acts 13:16-52 defined Pauls method of missiology and sermon outline.
He preached this kerygmatic message to the Jews in the local synagogue first, then to
Gentiles.

11
Birger Gerhardsson, "Evidence for Christs Resurrection According to Paul: 1 Cor 15:1-11,
Neotestamentica et Philonica (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2003), 77.

12
MacArthur, 402.


Spring
2010
86
Millard J. Erickson contended: For physical death is one of the evils countered and
overcome by Christs resurrection. He was himself delivered from physical death. This
verse [1 Cor 15:21], then, is proof that physical death came from humans sin; it was not
part of Gods original intention for the human race.
13
The evangelistic preaching in Acts
demonstrated the importance of the resurrection of Christ. Sure, many people lived a
life that was viewed as moral and good and were crucified; however, no one was sin-
free as Jesus was/is. Physical death has been defeated through the resurrection of
Christ. It is obvious that humans still die; however, deaths finality has been removed.
Erickson contended, Paul attributes to sin the power that physical death posses in the
absence of resurrection.
14
The resurrection fulfilled the Old Testament Scriptures and is
the essence of repentance and faith and the gift of the Holy Spirit. George Eldon Ladd
correctly observed, The tradition [based on historical fact] about the resurrection of Je-
sus must be believed in the heart and confessed with the mouth (Rom 10:8-9), and is-
sues in salvation. Such confession is possible only through the Holy Spirit (I Cor
12:3).
15

The Resurrection of Christ - Our Prototype

Jesus resurrection is unique, for it was the defeat of death, not a temporal return to life
like the raising of Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11:41-44). Jesus predicted several times
that He would rise from the dead. (See egeir in Mt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32;
27:63-66; Mk 14:28; Lk 9:22; and anistmi in Mk 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Lk 18:33; 24:7,
44-47). David E. Garland has listed several elements that make Christs death unique:
1. the manner of his death, which is so foolish and scandalous to the world;
2. the purpose of his death as an atonement that expiates human sins and extri-
cates them from the tentacles of sin and death;
3. the universal consequences of his death for all who will trust, not just for a par-
ticular city, nation, or group;
4. the conformity of his death to Gods purposes revealed in the Scriptures; and
5. his being raised by God to life after death.
16

13
Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (2
nd
ed.; Baker: Grand Rapids, 1983; repr. 1998), 1176.

14
Ibid., 630.

15
George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament (Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, 1974; repr.,
1986), 389.

16
David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians in the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 685. With regard to the second point, this writer prefers the word propitia-

Spring
2010
87
Nor is the resur-
rection of Jesus
an isolated
event
--Erickson

Some scholars have questioned the corroboration between Pauls early list of resurrec-
tion appearances in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 and the Gospel narratives.
17
This seems to
imply at least that the various Christian communities were unaware of what the others
were teaching with regard to the resurrection of Christ. One must remember,

The very fact that the Corinthian Christians themselves, and all other Christians
everywhere, had received the gospel and believed in Jesus Christ and had been
miraculously changed, was in itself a strong evidence of the power of the gospel,
which power is in the resurrection of Christ.
18

This section will consider the charge that there is little, if any,
correlation between the pre-canonical accounts of the
resurrection, the Pauline six-fold catalogue of resurrection
appearances, and the Gospel accounts of this great event.
Likewise, this section will offer general comments regarding
various details of Jesus resurrection appearances listed in 1
Corinthians 15:1-8.

The four canonical Gospels mention the empty tomb within their
resurrection narratives (Mt 28:6; Mk 16:6; Lk 24:2; Jn 20:47). L. J. Kreitzer argued,
Paul does explicitly mention the burial of Jesus (1 Cor 15:4; cf. Rom 6:4), he nowhere
mentions the empty tomb in connection with the resurrection.
19
The empty tomb is im-
plied in 1 Corinthians 15:3b-4, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scrip-
tures. (See also Mt. 27:64; Lk 24:46.) Based on the fact that Christ died in behalf of our
sins, Millard Erickson maintained:

tiom where Jesus not only extricates human sins and extricates them, as Garland stated, but He also
took upon Himself and suffered wrath from the Father. Note that Romans 3:25; 1 John 2:2, and 4:10
where inflected forms of hilasmos occur and are translated by the ESV, HCS, KJV, NASB, NASB (1995),
NKJV as propitiation; whereas, the NIV translates these inflected forms and cognates as atoning sacri-
fice. This writer vies anything other than propitiation as a watered-down translation.

17
John E. Alsup, The Post-Resurrection Appearance Stories of the Gospel Tradition: A History-of-
Tradition Analysis with Text-Synopsis (Calwer Theologische Monographien 5; Stuttgart, Germany: Calwer
Verlag, 1975), 57.

18
MacArthur, 399.

19
S.v., Resurrection, by L. J. Kreitzer.

Spring
2010
88
Nor is the resurrection of Jesus an isolated event; it is the beginning of the gen-
eral resurrection of all believers (1 Cor 15:20 in conjunction with Rom 1:3-4). Fur-
thermore, the fact of coming judgment pertains to everyone. We will all be evalu-
ated on the basis of our personal attitude toward and response to the gospel.
20

Note that Garland held that the phrase According to the Scriptures may apply only to
the resurrection (see Ps 16:9b-10; 56:13; 116:8) rather than to the resurrection on the
third day.
21
Jan Lambrecht correctly noted, Resurrection, however, is not as immedi-
ately affected by the burial as is death.
22
By the mention of burial between Christ died
and He was raised, the empty tomb of the Gospels is surely implied. Robert H. Stein
held that the omission is due to Pauls apologetic concerns: When it came to the resur-
rection appearances, the apostle could argue on equal terms with the other disciples.
He, too, had seen the Lord! He could not, however, say the same about the empty
tomb.
23

David Fergusson correctly observed that 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 indicates that the resur-
rection is conceived of as an event in the personal destiny of Jesus which made possi-
ble his subsequent appearances to Jesus.
24
Several scholars maintain the fact that
verses 3-8 contains a formula which Paul has taken over from the church tradi-
tions/[kerygma] is proved not only by his own explicit statement, but also by an analy-
sis.
25
The Pauline six-fold catalogue of Christs resurrection appearance in 1 Corin-

20
Erickson, Christian Theology, 1073.

21
Garland, 1 Corinthians, 687.

22
Jan Lambrecht, Line of Thought in 1 Cor 15, 1-11, Gregorianum 74.4 (1991): 663.

23
Robert H. Stein, Was the Tomb Really Empty," Themelios 5 (1979): 12.

24
David Fergusson, Interpreting the Resurrection, Scottish Journal of Theology 38.3 (1985):
292.

25
Hans Conzelman, 1 Corinthians, Hermenia, translated by James W. Dunkly (Philadelphia: For-
tress, 1975), 251. See also C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Peabody,
MA: Hendrickson, 1968), 337; Craig Blomberg, 1 Corinthians, in The NIV Application Commentary (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 295-96; Gerald L. Borchert, The Resurrection: 1 Corinthians 15, Review and
Expositor 80 Summer (1983): 401; F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians, in The New Century Bible Commen-
tary (ed. Matthew Black; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott Publishing, Ltd.,
1971), 138; John Calvin, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, in Calvins Commentaries (eds.
David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance, trans. by John W. Fraser; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960),
313; Garland, 1 Corinthians, 683-94; Birger Gerhardsson, Evidence for Christs Resurrection According
to Paul: 1 Cor 15:1-11, in Neotestamentica et Philonica Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2003), 80; Frederic Louis
Godet Commentary on First Corinthians (Grand Raids: Kregal, 1977), 758; Gary R. Habermas, Knowing
That the Resurrection Occurred: A Response to Stephen Davis, Faith and Philosophy 1 Spring (1985):

Spring
2010
89
thians 15:3-8 is not all-inclusive. Christ appeared to Mary Magdalene (Jn 20:1416) and
He appeared to two disciples on the Emmaus road (Lk 24:25-31). Critics such as Jo-
seph Klausner have errantly argued that the concept of the resurrection of Christ was
not really a historical phenomenon, but an invention of an questionable people like Pe-
ter and Mary Magdalene (not mentioned in 1 Cor 15).
26

a. He appeared to Cephas (Peter) (1 Cor 15:5a). The timing of this appearance
is not told in Scripture; however, it was sometime after the appearance to Mary Magda-
lene and the two disciples mentioned above (Peter and an unnamed disciple). Not only
is this event clearly paralleled in Luke 24:34, but along with the early pre-Pauline report,
John Kloppenburg identified the Lucan account as another early, pre-Gospel creedal
comment.
27
Paul Illingworth and Howard Hatton identified ophth as: He appeared is
literally he was seen, a verb form often used in Greek when speaking of supernatural
appearances. In some languages it is possible to render this verb as let himself be
seen or he showed himself to.
28
More specifically, Garland identified the usage of the

296; Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians, in Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preach-
ing (ed. James Luther Mays; Louisville: John Knox, 1997), 255; Richard C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation
of St. Pauks First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1937), 630; and
Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A commentary on the Greek Text, in The New
International Greek Testament Commentary, edited by I. Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand
Rapids and Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans and Carlise: The Paternoster Press, 2000), 1186-87.

26
Joseph Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth: His Life, Times, and Teachings (trans. Herbert Danby:
London: George Allen and Unwin, 1925), 356-59. Critical objections to the resurrection include a variety
of theories. The first theory is Jesus did not die on the cross. The argument runs that Jesus, overcome
by pain and physical exhaustion, fainted and was mistakenly taken down as dead. In the coolness of the
tomb He revived, and later the women found it empty. They concluded that He was alive and wonderful
stories began to circulate. But such an explanation bristles with difficulties. The skilled Roman execution-
ers were not likely to have allowed burial before Jesus was really dead. And how did He get out of the
tomb? How could this weak, wounded person stimulate the disciples into the vigorous life of the early
chapters of Acts? What became of Jesus? Where did He live and how and where did He finally die?
Questions multiply and answers do not appear. The second is to be found in hallucinations. The disci-
ples were in earnest and really believed that Jesus had risen, but it was all illusion; there was nothing real
to correspond to their visions. At first sight plausible, all such theories ignore what is known about hallu-
cinations. These happen to people more or less expecting them, but the disciples (especially Thomas)
never imagined seeing Jesus again. Hallucinations tend to continue once started, but the appearances
were mostly on the first day and they ceased abruptly after forty days. Hallucinations are personal, but
Paul said that more than five hundred people saw the risen Jesus at one time. The resurrection appear-
ances simply do not conform to the best knowledge about hallucinations.

27
John Kloppenborg, An Analysis of the Pre-Pauline Formula in 1 Cor 15:3b-5 in Light of Some
Recent Literature, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40 (1978): 358.

28
Paul Ellingsworth and Howard A. Hatton, A Translators Handbook on Paul's First Letter to the
Corinthians, in the United Bible Society Handbook Series; Helps for Translators (New York: United Bible
Societies, 1993), 332.

Spring
2010
90
verb in the LXX, in which it became a technical term for the appearance of God or Gods
messengers (cf. Gn12:7; 26:24; 35:1, 9; Ex 3:14-16).
29
According to Gerhardsson:

The expression [ophth] reflects the belief, not that the dead body of Jesus had
been resuscitated and that certain witnesses caught sight of him in a normal
earthly way, but that Jesus appeared himself from the celestial world. . . . The fo-
cus of the text is not on the seeing of the witnesses but on the appearances of
the resurrected Jesus.
30

MacArthur assumed the reason Jesus appeared to Peter first possibly was because of
Peters great remorse over having denied his Lord, and because his role as a leader
among the apostles and in the primitive church until the Council of Jerusalem (Acts
15).
31
Though it can be argued that the to Peter was pastoral in nature, Lenski argued
for a greater purpose, The other apostles, with the exception of John (Jn 20:8), still
doubted (Lk 24:22-24): but when Peter reported that he had seen the Lord, they joyfully
believed.
32

b. He . . . [appeared] to the twelve (15:5b). The use of the twelve was a refer-
ence to the eleven disciples even before Matthias replaced Judas. This concept corre-
lates to four accounts of Jesus appearances (Mt 28:16-20/Mk 16:7; Jn 20:24-29; Acts
1:6-11). Ellingsworth and Hatton observed, To the twelve: in some languages, or for
some groups of readers, it may be necessary to make it appear that the twelve were the
original apostles.
33
Anthony C. Thiselton, however, argued that The Twelve was in-
clusive of Matthias since Judas hung himself prior to the resurrection.
34
Calvin, in es-
sence settled the issue by recalling the mission of the twelve, But when we realize that
it was by Christs own ordering that twelve of them were set apart, even though one of
them would be struck off the list, it does not strike us as strange that the term was re-

29

30
Gerhardsson, Evidence for Christs Resurrection According to Paul: 1 Cor 15:1-11, 84.

31
MacArthur, 403.

32
Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Pauls First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians, 634. See
Godet, Commentary on First Corinthians, 765.

33
Ellingsworth and Hatton, A Translators Handbook, 332. See Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians, 140.

34
Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, in The New International Greek Tes-
tament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 1204.


Spring
2010
91
tained.
35
MacArthur concluded: Those men whom the Lord used to establish His
church on earth all saw Him in His resurrected body (Acts 1:22). They were capable,
honest, and reliable witnesses to the most important event of history.
36

c. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time
(15:6). Though no direct correlation with this particular number occurs in the Gospels,
Matthew relates Jesus appearance on a mountain in Galilee (28:16-20), and Mark pre-
dicts such an event (16:7). Ellingsworth and Hatton held that the word adelphoi (breth-
ren) usually in 1 Corinthians . . . means fellow Christians, but in this verse his follow-
ers (TEV) would be more correct.
37
MacArthur confirmed, Scripture gives no indication
of who those people were, or where Jesus appeared to them, but they were surely well
known in the early church, and, like the twelve, would often have been questioned about
seeing the risen Savior.
38
The adverb ephapax confirms that this resurrection appear-
ance to the five hundred was simultaneous.
Lenski concluded, That Peter, although he is at first mentioned alone, was among the
Twelve, and we must also conclude that the Twelve were among the 500.
39
The signifi-
cance of this is that Jesus not only appeared to some five hundred witnesses, but He
also appeared to some witnesses more than one time. Paul made specific reference to
the fact that many of these five hundred witnesses were still alive when he wrote 1 Co-
rinthians: most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep (15:6b).
d. Then He appeared to James (1 Cor 15:7a). Though two of the apostles have
the name James, the son of Zebedee (Mk 3:17) and the son of Alphaeus (Mk 3:18), it
appears that this James was the half-brother of Christ. Garland noted, Paul presumed
that the readers know who James is, and this casual mention also testifies to his impor-
tance.
40
James had been a skeptic concerning Jesus deity (Mk 3:20-21, 31-35; Jn 7:1-
5) but following his conversion he became a leader in the Jerusalem church (Acts 1:14;
12:17; 15:13-21; 21:18; Gal 1:18-19; 2:9, 12). This reference has no correlation in the

35
Calvin, The First Epistle of Paul The Apostle to the Corinthians, 314.

36
MacArthur, 403.

37
Ellingsworth and Hatton, A Translators Handbook, 332.

38
MacArthur, 404.

39
Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Pauls First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians, 638.

40


Spring
2010
92
canonical Gospels or Acts; however, the group in Acts 1:6-9 alludes may have included
James.
41

e. Then He appeared . . . to all the apostles (1 Cor 15:7b). A natural inclination
would be limit all the apostles to the eleven apostles, a technical reference with regard
to those who were the disciples who traveled with Jesus during His three-year ministry.
This interpretation would be redundant based on the reference to the twelve above.
Ellingsworth and Hatton differ from this position in that with the phrase All of the apos-
tles:
All is expressed here in the Greek, though not in verse 5. The order of the Greek
words may also suggest that all is emphasized, perhaps indicating a group larger
`than the twelve. The following verses strongly suggest that although Paul be-
came an apostle later, he was not included in the group mentioned here.
42

Thiselton observed: The word order in tois apostolois pasin suggests that the emphasis
falls on the apostles, not on all. . . . It denotes the apostolic body as a whole.
43
Bor-
chert concurred in that: Apostle is undoubtedly a word of mission, but is the report
merely a theological construct? Apparently to Paul, the apostles are a different group
than the Twelve and may include James.
44
The use of apostle here is wider than the
Twelve but not unlimited in scopemore limited perhaps than the group of 500 men-
tioned in verse 6.
45

The appearance of the resurrected Christ to Cephas, to the twelve, five hundred breth-
ren, James, and the apostles confirms the pre-Pauline tradition of this great doctrine.
Thiselton defined the purpose of the phrase [tois apostolois pasin]:

[It was] to pave the way for v. 8: the entire apostolate are bound up together in
witnessing to Christs saving work and resurrection: with his reference to his own
calling in v. 8, this will complete the list and establish this common foundational

41
Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1207 and Gerhardsson, Evidence for Christs
Resurrection According to Paul: 1 Cor 15:1-11, 86.

42
Ellingsworth and Hatton, A Translators Handbook, 333.

43
Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1208. The bold print was that of the author.

44
Borchert, The Resurrection, 405.

45
Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 343.

Spring
2010
93
The correlation
of the resurrec-
tion appearance
in the Gospels
and Acts is
significant.
apostolic witness to the reality of the resurrection as one of the cardinal elements
of the gospel (15:3).
46

f. He appeared to me [Paul] also (1 Cor 15:8). The appearances to Paul, as well
as James, confirmed that these appearances did not presuppose faith in Jesus or even
a positive attitude toward Him. Frank Stagg concluded that Paul "based his whole Chris-
tian faith and life upon the claim that Christ appeared to him."
47
MacArthur summarized
Pauls position with regard to the other apostles prior to his conversion:
Paul was not among the original apostles, all of whom had been
disciples of Jesus during His earthly ministry. He was not among the
five hundred other believers who had seen the resurrected Christ.
Rather, he had for many years been an unbeliever and a chief per-
secutor of the church.
48

The apparent reason Paul listed the above witnesses is to prepare the
way for his personal witness of the resurrected Christ.
49
Garland correctly
noted, As the last one [Christ appeared to], he represents the closing of a series so
that from the time of this last there can be on similar or equivalent events.
50
Christs
resurrection appearance to Paul on the Damascus Road has three parallel stories in
Acts (9:1-8; 22:6-11; 26:12-18). George Eldon Ladd observed, Paul himself insists that
what happened at Damascus was an appearance to him of the risen, glorified Jesus,
which he classifies with the appearance of Jesus during the forty days.
51
Note the em-
phatic kamoi, (to me). The appearance to Paul is probably the strongest evidence since
Paul is not dependent on a creedal statement, but it is from his personal witness or tes-
timony: But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove
vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me
(1 Cor 15:10).

46
Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1208.

47
Frank Stagg, New Testament Theology (Nashville: Broadman, 1962), 310.

48
MacArthur, 404-405.

49
Blomberg, 1 Corinthians, 303 and Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 334.

50
Garland, 1 Corinthians, 690. See P. R. Jones, 1 Corinthians 15:8: Paul the Last Apostle, Tyn-
dale Bulletin 36.1 (May, 1985): 16.

51
Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 367.

Spring
2010
94
Based on the comparison of the Pauline list of six post-resurrection appearances with
those in the Gospels and Acts, the following observations may be made with regard to
the resurrection appearances of Christ:

we have three clearly positive correlations (to Peter, the twelve, and to Paul), one
probable account (to all the apostles), one possible account (to the 500), and one
without confirmation (to James). Although this is by no means a direct match, the
partial correlation is difficult to miss.
52

Because these reports come from different sources, literary styles, geographical loca-
tions, and were written by different authors, the correlation of resurrection appearance
in the Gospels and Acts is significant. Unfortunately, form critics tend to ignore the bibli-
cal eyewitnesses of the resurrection, based on the erroneous concept that the resurrec-
tion was an invention of the church rather than a historical fact. It is clear that Jesus
earliest followers were convinced that they had seen the risen Jesus. Furthermore,
Hays asserted the testimony of this large number of witnesses confirms that Paul did
not think of the resurrection of Jesus as some sort of ineffable truth beyond history;
rather, it was an event that had occurred in the immediate past, an event for which his-
torical eyewitnesses testimony was readily available.
53

Secular First Century A.D. References
To the Resurrection of Christ

Though various sources refer to the resurrection of Jesus (i.e., patristic writings and ob-
scure references from less than credible sources), select sources from antiquity were
consulted. Both Jewish and Roman sources provide some clues as to how the resurrec-
tion of Jesus was documented or alluded to by historians of the first and second centu-
ries A.D. Keep in mind that this writer does not place these resources on equal grounds
with the Scriptures; however, these sources do support the early church belief in the
"superstitious beliefs of Christians" (resurrection of Christ), no matter what the authors
of these sources believed about Christ. These sources are listed according to the dating
of the authors/sources.

52
Steven L. Cox and Kendell H. Easley, eds., The Holman Christian Standard Harmony of the
Gospels (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2007), s.v., The Resurrection Appearances of Jesus, by Gary
Habermas.

53
Hays, First Corinthians, 257.


Spring
2010
95
a. Josephus (A.D. 37-100?)

Based on the statement ho Christos houtos n, this one was the Christ,
54
it appears
that Josephus had converted to Christianity; however, this is probably an interpolation.
Whether or not Josephus wrote this passage, Josephus (or an interpolator) did cite four
elements of the kerygmatic outline listed in section two of this paper: Jesus lived on
earth and did good deeds, the crucifixion, He fulfilled the Scriptures, and the resurrec-
tion occurred on the third day:

And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had con-
demned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for
he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold
these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of
Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day.
55

With the dating of Josephus Antiquities sometime in the seventh decade of the first
century A.D. this passage is an important reference to what Christians believed in the
second half of the first century. This passage reflects not only these four points, but also
that people of this era viewed these points as true/historical.

b. Tacitus (A.D. 56-117)

Tacitus, was a Roman orator, lawyer, and senator, who is considered as one of
antiquitys greatest historians. His major works, the Annals
56
and the Histories
57
, took for
their subject the history of the Roman Empires first century emperors, from the era of
the death of Augustus in A.D. 14 to Domitians death in A.D. 96. Though he was not a
Christian, he did make reference to Christ; however, the spelling of His name was the
Latinized Christus for the Greek Christos.

54
Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, The Loeb Classical Library, vol., 8 (trans. Ralph Marcus: Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press and London: William Heinemann, Ltd., 1980), 18.3.3.

55
Ibid.

56
Tacitus, The Annals of Tacitus in LCL, 3 volumes, translated by John Jackson (Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1994).

57
________, The Histories. LCL, 2 volumes, translated by Clifford H. Moore and John Jackson
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992).


Spring
2010
96
Tacitus' reference to Christ, (Christus), briefly mentioned the death of Christ in the con-
text of describing first century Christians. In essence Tacitus at least referred to two
points of the kerygma: the death of Christ and the faith and allegiance of those who fol-
lowed His teachings. According to Tacitus:

But neither human help, nor imperial munificence, nor all the modes of placating
Heaven, could stifle scandal or dispel the belief that the fire had taken place by
order. Therefore, to scotch the rumour, Nero substituted the culprits, and pun-
ished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their
vices, whom the crowd styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had
undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procura-
tor Pontius Pilate, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment,
only to break out once more, not merely in Judea, the home of the disease, but in
the capital itself [Rome]. . . .
58

Though the "superstition" was not named, it is probably a reference to the resurrection
of Christ. Note that this reference to Christ was from the writings of a person who did
not believe that Jesus was the Christ, it is obvious that many people held to the reality
of the Christ event, ranging culturally and geographically from Judea to Rome.

c. Seutonius (A.D. 75-160)

In The Lives of the Caesars, Nero, Suetonius made inference pertaining to Christ by
stating, "Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and
mischievous superstition."
59
As with the reference by Tacitus above, Seutonious' state-
ment "mischievous superstition" was not named, but it is probably a reference to the
resurrection of Christ.

d. Pliny the Younger (A.D. 61-112)

Pliny confirmed that true Christians refused to revile "the name of Christ: none of which
things, I understand, any genuine Christian can be induced to do."
60
The question was

58
Tacitus, The Annals, volume 5, 15.44.

59
Suetonius, The Lives of the Caesars, Claudius, LCL, volume 2, translation by J. C. Rolfe (Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, Ltd.), 6.16.2.

60
Pliny, "Letters and Panegyricus, LCL, volume2, translated by Betty Radice (Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1975), 10.96.5.


Spring
2010
97
not answered as to why Christians refused to deny Christ. Pliny's only response was, "I
am convinced that their stubbornness and unshakeable obstinacy ought not go unpun-
ished."
61

Pliny described the worship of Christians: "They had met regularly before dawn on a
fixed day to chant verses alternately among themselves in honour of Christ as if to a
god."
62
Though Pliny did not mention the resurrection of Christ; however, one must con-
sider that Pliny did affirm that Christians refused to renounce Christ because they
viewed Him as "a god." The question remained unanswered by Pliny as to why Chris-
tians would worship a "crucified man of no stature" and why Christians would stubbornly
die rather than renounce this "commoner."

e. Lucian (Approximately AD 125-180)

Though Lucian's work, Alexander the False Prophet, did not mention Christ, it did dem-
onstrate Roman malice against Christianity, which Lucian identified as misguided. In his
work The Passing of Peregrinus, Lucian 's description of Christians was less than flat-
tering: "The poor wretches have convinced themselves, first and foremost, that they are
going to be immortal and live for all time, in consequence of which they despise death
and even willingly give themselves into custody, most of them."
63
Though Lucian re-
ferred to Christ, his reference was not a confession, but disdain of the Christians who

still worship the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this
new cult into the world. . . (and whose) first lawgiver (Christ) persuaded them
that they are all brothers of one another after they have transgressed once for all
by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist himself and
living under his laws."
64

Though Lucian did not refer to the resurrection, he did acknowledge the impact that this
great event had on the people of the time.

61
Ibid., 10.96.3.

62
Ibid., 10.96.7.

63
Lucian, The Passing of Peregrinus, LCL, volume 5, translated by A. M. Harmon (London: Wil-
liam Heinemann, Ltd.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972 rpt.), 15.
64
Ibid, pp. 13, 15.

Spring
2010
98
It is nonsense to
confuse the faith of
the New Testament
with anything short
of the resurrection
in its fullest sense.
--Stagg
Though none of these writers were writing from the perspective of personally believing
in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Josephus was the only writer to speak of the resur-
rection, though Pliny, Seutonius, and Tacitus referred to Christianity as a "superstition"
which is clearly a reference to the resurrection. Furthermore, these secular writers
spoke of uncompromising Christians who chose to die rather than renounce Christ. First
Clement 42.3 stated, "Having therefore received commands, and being fully assured by
the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with faith confirmed by the word of God,
they went forth in the assurance of the Holy Spirit preaching the good news that the
Kingdom of God is coming.
65
Polycarp displayed courage in the time of persecution
based on the knowledge of the resurrection:

I bless thee, that Thou hast granted me this day and hour, that I may share,
among the number of the martyrs, in the cup of thy Christ, for the Resurrection to
everlasting life, both of soul and body in the immortality of the Holy Spirit. And
may I, to-day, be received among them before Thee, as a rich and
acceptable sacrifice, as Thou, the God who lies not and is
truth, hast prepared beforehand, and shown forth, and
fulfilled.
66

CONCLUSION

People in general state various reasons to deny the
resurrection. Some people deny the resurrection saying
that it is beyond human experience and could not possibly
happen. In the New Testament this was a popular doctrine of
the Sadducees, who held to annihilationism.

During a Ph.D. colloquium at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, in November
1988, the topic of the resurrection of Christ was debated by both faculty and graduate
students. The influence of Rudolf Bultmann on some professors and students was obvi-
ous. The climate of the day was to quote theologians rather than to cite Scripture.
Bultmann denied the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, and he held to a spiritual resur-
rection, which is the classical view of so-called Christian Gnosticism of the last half of

65
Apostolic Fathers, 1 Clement, LCL, vol. 1, translated by Kirsopp Lake (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press and London: William Heinemann, Ltd., 1985), 42.3.

66
The Martyrdom of Polycarp, The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 2, LCL, translated by Kirsopp Lake
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press and London: William Heinemann, Ltd., 1992), 14.2.

Spring
2010
99
the AD first century through the second century.
67
As the bell rang and people began to
leave, a professor, stated: "There is no necessity of believing in the resurrection of
Christ! Where does the Bible say that one must believe in the resurrection of Christ in
order to be saved?" I awkwardly cited Romans 10:9: "That if you confess with your
mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you
will be saved" (NAS). Without the resurrection salvation could not have been provided,
and without belief in the resurrection salvation cannot be received. MacArthur con-
curred, "It is not possible, therefore, to be a Christian and not believe in the resurrection
of Jesus Christ."
68

Some people contemplate that the resurrection may or may not have occurred. Evi-
dence from New Testament manuscripts, from the writings of the apostolic fathers, from
the works of ancient secular authors, from the ancient creeds and hymns found in the
New Testament, have been examined. All this evidence leads to the firm conclusion that
the New Testament is reliable and contains the authentic testimony of witnesses and
what the New Testament writers wrote. Stagg concluded, "It is nonsense to confuse the
faith of the New Testament with anything short of resurrection in its fullest sense."
69

Some people say that the bodily resurrection of Jesus probably occurred, but that it is a
meaningless puzzle for today. Wayne Grudem clarified the significance of the resurrec-
tion:

Christs resurrection was not simply a coming back from the dead, as had been
experienced by others before, such as Lazarus (Jn 11:144), for then Jesus
would have been subject to weakness and aging and eventually would have died
again just as all other human beings die. Rather, when he rose from the dead
Jesus was the first fruits (1 Cor 15:20, 23) of a new kind of human life, a life in
which his body was made perfect, no longer subject to weakness, aging, or
death, but able to live eternally.
70

67
Bultmann does not openly state his position of denying a bodily resurrection of Christ; however,
when one reads his commentary on the Gospel of John he openly refers to his form critical position that
views this Gospel as the invention of the early church, including the bodily resurrection of Christ. See Ru-
dolf Bultmann, The Gospel of John (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971), 681-99.

68
MacArthur, 398.

69
Stagg, 316.

70
Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic theology: An introduction to biblical doctrine (Leicester, England:
Inter-Varsity and Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 608.


Spring
2010
10
0
Sure, people may choose to deny this conclusion, but to do so is to go against all the
available evidence. MacArthur concluded, "Without the resurrection, Christianity would
be so much wishful thinking, taking its place alongside all other human philosophy and
religious speculation."
71

71
MacArthur, 398.

Journal Spring 2010 Issue PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Journal Spring 2010 Issue PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Journal of Biblical Ministry

Você também pode gostar