What Jesus Said
I’ve been reading The Method and Message of Jesus’ Teaching by Robert H. Stein this month and I’m about 1/3 of the way through. It is not the easiest book to read and it would be better suited for a classroom, not so much for reading on an airplane or lounging in your living room.
Strangely enough, I listened to Andy Stanley’s podcast on Monday from his sermon he did on 1/31 called “Taking Responsibility for your Life: Embrace your responsibility”. Andy said that Jesus’ parables had one central point in each parable – the details of the parable are NOT important and many of them would never happen or might even not be possible. He then went through the parable of the talents and explained all Jesus was trying to say was that you need to leverage what you are given for God, regardless of the amount you are given. He said the fact that the lazy servant hid his talent (gold was Andy’s translation) in the ground is an example of this; no one would hide $300,000 worth of gold in the ground for safekeeping as there were much safer ways of taking care of that gold that were far easier.
This sermon coincided with exactly what I was reading about in the book. The earliest church fathers such as Origen, Augustine, and Tertullian all treated the parables as allegories. For example in the parable of the good Samaritan, the man is walking from Jerusalem to Jericho. Origen said that the man was Adam and that Jerusalem is paradise and Jericho is this world. Martin Luther said Origen’s interpretation was worth “less than dirt” but he had a similar allegorical translation of the same parable. Reading Andy Stanley’s message into this parable – the fact that he was going to Jerusalem to Jericho is irrelevant and he might as well have been going from Manhattan to Brooklyn.
So who’s right? Why did the earliest church fathers read so much into each parable and why does Andy Stanley (and Robert H. Stein for that matter) believe that there is usually only one main point to each parable and that the details might even be irrelevant?
It seems to me that pastors, bloggers, book writers, whoever – can make Jesus say whatever they want by either allegorizing everything about a parable or ignoring the details of the parable.
As for me, I’ve been trying to just lean on the Holy Spirit as I read the Bible personally. I’ve been begging Him to remove preconceived notions and just speak directly into my life and to clear my head of all the “noise” made by others (no matter how well meaning that particular “noise”). The result has been the blessing of a true peace as I read the Scripture – a peace that lets me know that God is huge and no amount of study will ever let me wrap my head around Him. Makes me wonder if my daughter has the right idea when she points at the sky and says “God is way way WAY up there!” and then runs through the yard without a care in the world….
Strangely enough, I listened to Andy Stanley’s podcast on Monday from his sermon he did on 1/31 called “Taking Responsibility for your Life: Embrace your responsibility”. Andy said that Jesus’ parables had one central point in each parable – the details of the parable are NOT important and many of them would never happen or might even not be possible. He then went through the parable of the talents and explained all Jesus was trying to say was that you need to leverage what you are given for God, regardless of the amount you are given. He said the fact that the lazy servant hid his talent (gold was Andy’s translation) in the ground is an example of this; no one would hide $300,000 worth of gold in the ground for safekeeping as there were much safer ways of taking care of that gold that were far easier.
This sermon coincided with exactly what I was reading about in the book. The earliest church fathers such as Origen, Augustine, and Tertullian all treated the parables as allegories. For example in the parable of the good Samaritan, the man is walking from Jerusalem to Jericho. Origen said that the man was Adam and that Jerusalem is paradise and Jericho is this world. Martin Luther said Origen’s interpretation was worth “less than dirt” but he had a similar allegorical translation of the same parable. Reading Andy Stanley’s message into this parable – the fact that he was going to Jerusalem to Jericho is irrelevant and he might as well have been going from Manhattan to Brooklyn.
So who’s right? Why did the earliest church fathers read so much into each parable and why does Andy Stanley (and Robert H. Stein for that matter) believe that there is usually only one main point to each parable and that the details might even be irrelevant?
It seems to me that pastors, bloggers, book writers, whoever – can make Jesus say whatever they want by either allegorizing everything about a parable or ignoring the details of the parable.
As for me, I’ve been trying to just lean on the Holy Spirit as I read the Bible personally. I’ve been begging Him to remove preconceived notions and just speak directly into my life and to clear my head of all the “noise” made by others (no matter how well meaning that particular “noise”). The result has been the blessing of a true peace as I read the Scripture – a peace that lets me know that God is huge and no amount of study will ever let me wrap my head around Him. Makes me wonder if my daughter has the right idea when she points at the sky and says “God is way way WAY up there!” and then runs through the yard without a care in the world….
Labels:
allegory,
Jesus,
parable,
translation
Ummmm...yeah. Don't agree with pretty much any of that :)
"the details of the parable are NOT important"...i'm guessing he said that for "shock" value (it's pretty rampant these days)
If he didn't, i'd be scared to see how Jesus felt about someone saying some of his actual words spoken really didn't have any meaning...they were just "fluff"
I can't remember for the life of me where I read this recently, but it was on the "Good Samaritan Parable" and it spent a good poriton of it's time explaing the importance of Samaria, where it was located, and why it was significant to the story for the culture of that time. Pretty much was the WHOLE reason for the parable.
I couldn't disagree more that the details aren't important. The details make up how we interpret the parable. Sorry Andy, you are getting a little too seeker driven for me. The details are important but I do understand that there is a bit of allegory in them but let's not throw the baby out with the bath water
Well let's look at the parable of the good Samaritan. What's the point? It's that the looked down upon Samaritan was actually the one who was a neighbor to the robbed/beaten man not the priest or levite (the ones supposedly who knew the law perfectly). So what did Jesus say about the Samaritan? "Go and do likewise."
Are we really supposed to read into a parable like this:
Robbers = devil and his angels
stripping him = taking away his immortality
beating him = persuading him to sin
Priest = Priesthood of the law
Levite = Prophets
Good Samaritan = Christ
Binding of wounds = restraint of sin
Oil = comfort of good hope
Wine = Exhortation of Spirited work
etc etc....(I could keep going because Augustine listed them all).
I think that's what Andy was saying - most parables have one major point.
Details and literal interpretation of every fact and nuance are different things. Details are important to understand the parable but of course we aren't supposed to literally interpret a parable...otherwise it wouldn't be a parable. But I just don't like it when a parable gets minimized to "1 major point" and once you get that you don't need anything else. Are there any minor points that are useful? Would we gleam anything from the parable upon further study or once we get the major point can we stop reading the parable since we understand it fully?
So what else would you glean from that parable?
BTW - I'm not saying that I 100% agree either. I think certainly some parables definitely use allegory (for instance I argued allegorical use when we discussed the Rich man and Lazarus).
My point is that we (authors, pastors, etc) pick and choose based on what we want Jesus to have said.
Here are just a few i found...
"Jesus was asked, on another occasion, "Who then is my neighbor? (Luke 10:29-37). His answer is the story of the Good Samaritan. What was his point? Namely that anybody I come in contact with, who has a real need, is my neighbor. This includes those who are enemies." ARMSTRONG
"Also, the good Samaritan is one of the most classic stories ever told on the subject of mercy (Luke 10:30-37)." Driscoll
"The pattern laid forth is that of the Good Samaritan, a man who at great cost to himself cared for a dying stranger, one that all the rest of society (religious and otherwise) was ignoring (sound familiar?). Those that Christ condemns are the religious leaders who saw the dying man, but passed by on the other side, without doing a thing. How many of us are passing by on the other side as it relates to abortion" Spielman
"After Luke 3:11 the best text for why we should share our food with the poor is the parable of the Good Samaritan." Piper
LOL...maybe you are on to something....
My devotions this morning included Matt 18 - the parable of the unmerciful servant. I really only see one major point here; forgive others their debts because you have been forgiven a much larger debt. That's the point. You could however, launch into a discussion about what will happen to you if you do not forgive (see verses 32-35).
The major point of this parable was describing the kingdom of Heaven "Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king..." -- forgiving debts is a point that the parable makes it order to describe the kingdom of heaven. There are so many verses about this large topic that you could go on for days describing the kingdom of heaven.
So the parable may be making one major point but I hope folks like Andy would talk about the kingdom of heaven when discussing this parable and not only about forgiving debts if there is really only 1 major point to discuss.
So i see you have bought into the "one major point" criticism, you have already mentioned it twice in 3 posts.
Maybe Andy feels like "most" christians are so shallow, if he just can get us to cling to one idea at a time it will have a more life changing effect on the masses.
Not everyone is as knowleagable and astute as yourself.