Chapter # 4 Paragraph # 1 Study # 2
January 21, 2020
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(136)
1901 ASV
2 And he taught them many things in parables, and said unto them in his teaching,
3 Hearken: Behold, the sower went forth to sow:
4 and it came to pass, as he sowed, some [
seed] fell by the way side, and the birds came and devoured it.
5 And other fell on the rocky [
ground], where it had not much earth; and straightway it sprang up, because it had no deepness of earth:
6 and when the sun was risen, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away.
7 And other fell among the thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit.
8 And others fell into the good ground, and yielded fruit, growing up and increasing; and brought forth, thirtyfold, and sixtyfold, and a hundredfold.
9 And he said, Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
- I. Teaching in Parables.
- A. "At issue" in "parable".
- 1. The root verb is "paraballo".
- a. Its etymology (origins) consist of the preposition "para" and the verb "ballo" and presented the idea of "casting" something "alongside" another thing so that the one can be viewed in the light of similarities with the other.
- 1) Mark used this verb one time: 4:30. This one use is highly informative in that it is used both along with "homoioo" (as a verb with significant overlap in meaning with "paraballo") and along with the idea that "the Kingdom of God" is, in very large part, a vast "mystery" to earth-bound, fallen human beings because of the total absence of human experience of that "Kingdom" for men of this world. Jesus, in John 3:12-13, raised this very issue with Nicodemus in that "heavenly things" have never been "experienced" by "earthly" men so that they have no way of knowing the "truth" about them except by "parallels" that exist between "heavenly things" and "earthly things". And, according to Jesus, only He could be a valid witness of those heavenly things since He alone had "come down from heaven" with experience of that realm.
- a) The "danger" of the use of "parables" is that fallen men may try to force the things "known" from the lesser realm upon the greater "unknown" realm. For example, the Sea of Galilee could be a "parable" of the Mediterranean Sea for someone who lived in Galilee and never got over to the Mediterranean. There are sufficient similarities to make particular valid comparisons (both are "seas", after all), but it would be a large mistake to try to force the shores of the Sea of Galilee upon the unknown Mediterranean Sea so that the shape and dimensions of the "known" are made to be the same as the "unknown". This is the "weakness" of teaching by parable: men might draw certain of their conclusions from "parallels" that do not actually exist between the known and the unknown.
- b) For a "parable" to be effective, the "comparisons" have to be limited to what actually exist between the two being "compared".
- c) Thus, for a parable to be helpful, the user has to reveal which attributes of the known are actually comparable to the unknown and which are not.
- 2) The only other use of this verb in the New Testament is Acts 20:15.
- a) This "use" is non-parabolic: it is not a "comparison" of one thing with another.
- b) This "use" is etymological: it refers to a ship under sail that was "cast alongside of" Samos by the winds.
- b. Since there are only two uses of this verb in the New Testament and one of them is "etymological", we can safely assume that the word had not traveled far in shifting meanings from its roots. For example, "That's not my bag", when used to refer to something that a person does not have any interest in, uses "bag" in a way that is a far cry from its etymology (it has "traveled far in shifting meanings"). Thus, a "parable" is a "casting of two things alongside one another" for the purpose of learning something of the unknown of the two from the known of the two. But, much care must be used in defining the parameters of that something.
- 2. A "parable" is a "verbal communication technique".
- a. This means that it is, first of all, a "tool" of communication by language.
- b. In regard to this "communication", when God is the Author of the content, that content is "Life-directed". This means that He intends for the "parable" to be fruitful in the direction of "Life", at least for somebody.
- 1) In our present context, the disciples actually raise the chief "problem" of the use of "parables" if communication-unto-Life is actually intended (they highlighted the "problem" of using "parables" if "Life" is really the goal: 4:10). And, this highlighting is immediately on the heels of Jesus' clear declaration that only those who "have ears to hear" will possess the ability to actually "hear" (with comprehension).
- a) Matthew is a bit more clear in his record (13:10) in that he records the disciples as asking "why parables?", whereas Mark's record could, possibly, be taken to mean that they are asking "what did You mean?" But, Mark's record actually strongly implies that they, like Matthew says, did not mean "What did You mean?" but why are you speaking in parables? We don't understand and if we don't, how do You expect this larger crowd to grasp Your doctrine?
- b) Mark goes on to say that Jesus did address the "What did you mean?" question in His "Know ye not this parable?", but this simply strengthens Matthew's point: "Why are You using a language technique that even we cannot understand?"
- 2) Thus, Mark reveals that "parables" are one of a plethora of "literary design" issues that, when understood, make meaning clearer.
- 2. The noun form of the word is used in 48 texts/contexts in the New Testament. Forty-six of them are in Matthew, Mark, and Luke and always refer to Jesus using this teaching technique. Two of them are used in Hebrews in a highly instructive way.
- a. Hebrews 9:9, in context, says that the entire sacrificial system was a very large "parable" that was intended to communicate one very major reality: "that system could not qualify those within it for an actual one-on-one relationship with God". It was a "parable" about man's most fundamental inadequacy: his pursuit of "obedience to the Law" to qualify himself for acceptance by God was doomed to failure from the very beginning.
- b. Hebrews 11:19, in context, says that Abraham's mental, emotional, faith-rooted offering of his son was the equivalent of a physical obedience that was followed by a physical resurrection. Thus, a "parable" reaches beyond the "outer expression" of the inner attitudes to those very inner attitudes: it makes the "unknowable" (by typical methods) "known".