IN THE WORDS OF JESUS–Part 160

YES, HE is Talking to YOU! (continued)

Love is the Fulfilling of the Law

Our last two essays, regarding a very difficult saying by the Master, are now behind us. To clarify our understanding of this saying we need to understand the context in which it is given and recognize the differences between its presentation in the three gospels as well to have a clear understanding of its parabolic nature. We have been over some of this before but it does bear a second look. This saying is purported by the much of the church to be directed at the scribes and Pharisees but we cannot be sure that this is so and some evidence opposes this view. For our premise to work properly in our minds, we need to rely on the reality of the meanings of words and their application to this saying by the Master. Remembering another discourse between Jesus and the Pharisees regarding John the Baptist when He said to them “I will also ask you one thing; and answer me: the baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men?” and to which they reply: “that they could not tell whence it was” (Luke 20:4, 7) should help us to gain the idea that the answers to this question and most questions posed about the teachings of the Master are from the heart. These Pharisees, according to the gospels, reasoned among themselves for the right answer, the convenient one, saying “If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then believed ye him not? But and if we say, Of men; all the people will stone us: for they be persuaded that John was a prophet” (Luke 20:5-6). There is a lesson in this exchange and this lesson is hard to be learned because is causes one to change the ways of their prior thinking. These Pharisees knew the answer to the question in their hearts but they could not repeat it for whatever one of a variety of reasons which are likely all concerned with their pride and position. This thought of what is in one’s heart leads us to our next topic which follows, in the Gospel of Matthew, our original dialogue from the talk of Satan and the demons to this idea we are finishing now of the unpardonable sin. So, again, we will look at some of the ideas that do effect the proper understanding of this most difficult verse in the three synoptic gospels.

In Matthew’s Gospel, which is the source of the next verses that we will discuss, this saying comes in what appears to be a public place where they bring to Jesus one possessed. In this sequence of events the man healed of the demon is both blind and dumb and this healing results in their thoughts and comments about Jesus casting out devils by the power of Beelzebub. The Master proceeds to speak to them on this as we have discussed telling them of the house divided and the strong man and then “He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad” before going into our subject verses: “Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come” We should note here how this saying is repeated twice; once concerning all manner of sin and the next specific to words against the Son of man. 

As we said previously the versions in Mark’s Gospel and Luke’s vary somewhat from that of Matthew. In Mark the scene is in a house and there is no man healed of a demon; in fact, there is not any reference to Jesus casting out anything prior to this sequence where our subject saying is made. Now this does not matter and it is only mentioned as to show the difference in the presentation; the scribes do accuse the Master and he does respond as in our writing on this parable. Mark does offer for us the understanding that all of this is parable by saying, just before the Master’s words, that “….and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?” (Mark 3:23) and our subject verse is a part of this dialogue. Now in both Matthew and in Mark the speaking of this parable about the unpardonable sin does follow the dialogue with the scribes and the Pharisees as noted above and this can give rise to the idea that Jesus is speaking to them. Luke however paints this a bit differently but it could be said in the same context. In Luke, after the dialogue that we presented and up to the point of Jesus saying “He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth” (Luke 11:23), and then the Parable of the Unclean Spirit, the three gospels are more or less in agreement. There are differences in the sequence of events and the nature of the surroundings. In Luke however our subject verses do not appear for quite a while; the Master goes from the Parable of the Unclean Spirit to additional teachings and then goes to dine with a Pharisee. Here Jesus goes into a series of accusations against the scribes and the Pharisees and the a lawyers. One must assume that He left this place as Luke tells us that: “when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people…..he began to say unto his disciples” (Luke 12:1). Here we cannot be sure who, if any, of the people He is addressing other than His own disciples and any of the throng that may have overheard. He teaches them several things here and then comes the Parable of Speaking Well which has been our subject. Should this alone, that He is apparently speaking here to His disciples, be enough to cast some doubt on the supposition that this Parable of Speaking Well is just against the scribes and the Pharisees and said to them, or can we say that this tells us of more significance in what the Master is saying? To this add that the direction of His words as He is addressing whosoever and add also, our understanding that this is, after all, a parable.

We have been using the idea of the Master’s teaching by parable extensively to explain much of what He says that is rather obscure on its face and for which we do not readily see a meaning. Lest we be accused of creating an idea for which there is no foundation, let us again look at the nature of a parable and what the Master and the writers of the gospels say about them for if we call most everything a parable and claim that there is a deeper meaning, we should know that what we are saying is valid. Again, this is repetitious but necessary and we will add in here some new ideas here to help us to understand. Let us begin with the sayings of the Master and the writers of the gospels:

• Our first thought here should be the Master’s words. Speaking to His disciples He tells them “Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given , and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath . Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand” Matthew 13:11-13). Mark records this similar saying as “And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables” (Mark 4:11). Lest we leave out Luke, this is the wording that he gives us of this saying by the Master: “Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand” (Luke 8:10).
• Speaking to His disciples, the Master also questions why they do not understand asking: “And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables” (Mark 4:13). We know, from previous essays, that Jesus gave His disciples detailed explanations of the The Parable of the Sower and the Parable of the Tares and in each, the explanation can also be seen as a parable to us still (In the Words of Jesus parts 97, 98 and 100).  We know that while Jesus explained parables to His disciples, that they were still not completely understanding what He said.  When He speaks to them of the leaven of the Pharisees, He has to remind them of the miracles of the loaves after which He says to them: “How is it that ye do not understand?” (Mark 8:21). Also, after refuting the Pharisees regarding the washing of things, He is asked by Peter what it was that He meant by His parable, to which the Master replies: “Are ye also yet without understanding? (Matthew 15:16). Finally, toward the end, after the supper and on the way to the garden the Master says to His disciples: “These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father” to which “His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb” (John 16:25, 29). 
• The writers of the gospels also tell us of the Master’s use of parables saying: “All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them” (Matthew 13:34). Mark tells us “But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone , he expounded all things to his disciples” (Mark 4:34). Matthew also tells us how Jesus speaking in parables is the fulfillment of prophesy and of the of the overwhelming depth of the words of the Master: “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying , I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 13:35).

With all this there should be little or no doubt that what we are saying regarding the teachings of the Master being in parable, even when we are not told by the writer that any particular saying is a parable, is valid. This should tell us also that there is depth to be discovered in most every word. We should know also that for us the depth that we discover will be pertinent Life lessons and ideas that will help us all attain to the Kingdom of God. We spent much time here reviewing the last saying and discussing the Master’s use of parables Since there is not enough time to pursue our next topic, let us look at some of what Vincent tells us about the parable as it exists in the New Testament.

Vincent tells us that the word translated as parable is parabole which is from para, beside, and ballo, to throw. A parable is a form of teaching in which one thing is thrown beside another. Hence its radical idea is comparison…..The word is used in a wide range of scripture, but always involves the idea of comparison:

1. Of brief sayings, having an oracular or proverbial character. Thus Peter (Matt. xv.1 15), referring to the words “If the blind lead the blind,” etc., says, “declare unto us this parable.”
2. Of a proverb. The word for proverb (paronoimia) has the same idea at the root as parable. It is para, beside, oimia, a way or road. This however does not match with the lexicon² nor is it referenced this way in Strong’s³ but we should realize that Vincent is a great source for this type things. Also note that both of these Greek words are translated as both parable and proverb as we have previously discussed.
3. Of a song or poem, in which an example is set up by way of comparison.
4. Of a word or discourse which is enigmatcal or obscure until the meaning is developed by application of comparison. It occurs along with the  words enigma, and a problem, something put forth or proposed. Vincent gives several Old Testament references here and then continues saying: In this sense Christ uses parables symbolically to expound the mysteries of the kingdom of God; as utterances which conceal from one class what they reveal to another (Matt. xiii, 11-13), and in which familiar facts of the earthly life are used figuratively to expound truths of the higher life. The unspiritual do not link these facts to the natural life with those  of the supernatural, which are not discerned by them (1 Cor. iii. 14), and therefore they need an interpreter of the relation between the two. Such symbols assume the existence of a law common to the natural and spiritual worlds under which the symbol and the thing symbolized alike work; so that the one does not merely resemble the other superficially, but stands in actual coherence and harmony with it. Christ formulates such a law in connection with the parables of the Talents and the Sower. “To him that hath shall be given. From him that hath not shall be taken away.” That is a law of morals and religion as of business and agriculture. One must have in order to make. Interest requires capital. Fruit requires no only seed but soil. Spiritual fruitfulness requires an honest and good heart. Similarly, the law of growth set forth in the parable of the Mustard Seed, is law common to nature and to the kingdom of God. The great forces in both kingdoms are germinal, enwrapped in small seeds which unfold from within by the inherent power of growth. We need not agree with all that Vincent says here but his points do add some clarity to what we have been saying.
5. A parable is also an example or type; furnishing a model or a warning; as the Good Samaritan, the Rich Fool, the Pharisee and the Publican. The element of comparison enters here as between the particular incident imagined or recounted and all cases of a similar kind.

Vincent goes on to tell us that the term parable, however, as employed in ordinary Christian phraseology, is limited to to those utterances of Christ which are marked by a complete figurative history or narrative. It is thus defined by Goebel (“Parables of Jesus”). “A narrative moving within the sphere of physical or human life, not professing to describe an event which actually took place, but expressly imagined for the purpose of representing, in pictorial figure, a truth belonging to the sphere of religion, and therefore referring to the relation of man or mankind to God.”

In form, the New Testament parables resemble the fable. The distinction between them does not turn on the respective use of rational and irrational beings speaking and acting. There are fables where the actors are human. Nor does the fable always deal with the impossible, since there are fables in which an animal, for instance, does nothing contrary to its nature. The distinction lies in the religious character of the New Testament parable as contrasted with the secular character of the fable. While the parable exhibits the relations of man to God, the fable teaches lessons of worldly policy or natural morality and utility. “The parable is predominantly symbolic; the fable, for the most part, typical, and therefore presents its teaching only in the form of example, for which reason it chooses animals by preference, not as symbolic, but as typical figures; never symbolic in the sense in which the parable mostly is, because the higher invisible world, of which the parable sees and exhibits the symbol in the visible world of nature and man, lies far from it. Hence the parable can never work with fantastic figures like speaking animals, trees,” etc. (Goebel, condensed)⁴.

This is an understanding of the parable and the use of the parable by the Master and in terms that could not come from anywhere else but Mr. Vincent. His words, plus what we have been saying in these posts, should give us enough confidence in the idea that there is ever more revelation in His words than we have heretofore seen and the courage to continue to expound what is revealed to us and in us. That others have not said what we say and likely would not agree is of small moment if we believe that the nature of all that the Master said was intended to lead us into His Kingdom and His Presence.

Note on the Quote of the Day