Interpreting Bible Parables

A parable is a story, but not just any story we have heard. They are short stories that make a point or some say a biblical truth. But the point is highly dependent upon its audience and context. Parables do not come straight out and say what they mean. Instead they cause the hearer to think about and ponder its meaning and application to them, thus making it very memorable. To be able to get the meaning, in the case of the Bible, Jesus says it has to be given to us from the Father. A parable is a short story or saying that has a type of “punch line.” This is not a “ha ha” funny kind of punch line but more of a shocking point that makes it more memorable and sometimes offensive to the listener. It is something that not only jolts you awake, but makes you think. So a parable is a hidden or dark saying, a figure of speech, like a riddle or even like a dark joke. I’ve always heard the following definition that a parable is an “earthly story that conveys a moral or spiritual truth,” but as I’ve reviewed above, there is just a bit more to it than that. If we take seriously that all the Bible speaks of Christ, then they are not just about morals, but about Him. Some may (and many followers did) leave from the presence of Jesus not understanding, or maybe only glean a moral insight about life without grasping the real point of what is going on. Parables really force us to struggle with the surrounding texts to answer, “What’s the point?” They are like our modern day use of illustrations when it comes to teaching and preaching. They were (and are) a communication tool for getting people engaged in the conversation. You were no longer a passive listener being told what to believe but presented with a word puzzle to figure out.




A good bit of parables make allegorical comparisons. We can infer allegory in attempts to interpret parables because Jesus does so when interpreting His own parables. In Matthew 13 Jesus interprets the parable of the sower and teaches that the sower is the Son of Man, and that the field is the world. This is key because in most all parables the main character is the God or Christ- like figure being portrayed. In most cases this should be your starting point. The problem with using allegory and simile in parables is that sometimes it’s hard to know when to stop. As a Sunday school teacher of mine used to say, “Sometimes a tree is just a tree, sometimes a bird is just a bird.” Again it is the makeup of a parable to use something from everyday life to teach or drive home a point. If everything about the everyday life becomes allegory throughout, then the reality of that situation is lost. It is like a mirror reflection of reality, but like a mirror something is different, or just a bit off, there is a strangeness to it that makes you ponder over it.  




Within other parables you may need to test the relationships that are being established via comparisons. Use the formula “A” is to “B” as “a” is to “b” with regard to “X.”Kind of like those SAT tests most of us have taken in life. There is a riddle of sorts on the test to figure out what is being compared. So too the parable is trying to get you to make educated comparison of something known to uncover some truth in view (Luke 14:7-24).




Also I’ll point out that most parables have about as many points as it has major characters; like the parable of the prodigal son. We commonly reflect on the relationship of the son that leaves and returns to his father. Typically we stop there and there is little to say about the son who remained.  But he is included for a reason, we are left wondering if he will go in to celebrate with his brother or not, and in this we see the question posed to the Pharisees. Will they go in with those being saved or not? Jesus indicates that there is room for them too, and is just as interested in their salvation, as the son who was lost. So like our formula above Jesus is to sinners, as the father is toward the younger son, welcoming him into the kingdom. So also Jesus is to the self-righteous, as the father is toward the elder son, correcting and yet still inviting him into the kingdom as well.




Parables have a variety of effects upon their audience. We see from Matthew 13:13, and Mark 4:11-12 that parables are a form of judgment. Plain words are taken away, both because they do not perceive what they should understand already, and as a result they are left in a condition so that they will not see or grasp the truth conveyed. The parable comes from matters of everyday life, stories of sowing seeds, weddings and common events, but they all have some unusual twist or exaggeration that makes them more memorable and thought provoking. Some are even open ended to allow the listener to fill in the blank about how or what ending is appropriate. A parable has that shock effect that stuns those who are hostile to Christ. They defend because His opposition cannot accuse him of saying anything outright and straightforward. The listeners have to make their own interpretation of the saying. They are stunned in one sense and have to put their hostilities aside to figure out just what Jesus said. In some cases the meaning is rather easy to grasp and they become more enraged (Luke 20:19).


Interpreting Bible Parables.



Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “Interpreting Bible Parables

  1. Robert Hagedorn

    Saint Augustine couldn’t do it, but can someone else explain what kind of fruit Adam and Eve ate in the story? This may sound silly, but after 6000+ years we deserve an intelligent explanation. No guesses, opinions, or beliefs, please–just the facts that we know from the story.

    • Although more of an attempt to advertise for another blog, I’d give the simple answer that we just do not know the nature of the fruit involved. The nature of the fruit would distract from the nature of the tree. We know the name of the tree as “the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. This designation comes from the command imposed upon the tree and not the nature of the tree itself. The fruit does not produce such knowledge, but the forbidden action of eating does. The sin is not one of sudden knowledge of good and evil, but the choosing and deciding for one’s self what is good and what is evil. The fall of Adam was one in which he chose the role of God as so in this new autonomy make the call as to what is good and what is evil. To Adam the choice to eat was a choice to deny that God was right in forbidding him to eat of it. Boldly or timidly, the action of eating was the turning away from God knowing what was best, and man wanting to make those decisions for himself.

Comments or Questions?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s