I cannot for the life of me see how her analysis adds anything to the commentary.
Especially since she gets it wrong.
In the ‘good Samaritan’:
- the priest and Levite are heading to Jericho? Really? Umm… no – the man who gets robbed is heading that way! The parable doesn’t say that the priest and Levite are, as well!
- all the parable does is make Jewish law look bad? No – it demonstrates that even in following the Law, we can miss caring for one another.
- the author seems to be unable to keep her own point straight. She writes, “[t]he parable is often seen as a story of how the oppressed minority are “nice” and therefore we should check our prejudices.” She dismisses this as the wrong interpretation; rather, she suggests, “We are the person in the ditch, and we see the Samaritan. Our first thought: ‘He’s going to rape me. He’s going to murder me.’ Then we realize: Our enemy may be the very person who will save us.” In other words: ‘check our prejudices’.
In the parable of the laborers, she suggests, “Jesus’ first listeners heard not a parable about salvation in the afterlife but about economics in present. They heard a lesson about how the employed must speak on behalf of those who lack a daily wage.” Pardon? If this is the lesson, then surely, there is a character in the story who “lacks a daily wage.” Perhaps she can point them out to us… but there’s no such character in this parable.
Everyone in the parable heeds the call of the landowner, and therefore,
all have a daily wage. If the moral was “keep going out into the marketplace and finding those who have not yet found work,” then surely, Jesus’ conclusion would have been along those lines, right? Yet… no. Instead, it’s “'am I not free to do as I wish? Are you envious because I am generous?’ Thus, the last will be first, and the first will be last.”
Does that parable give us the opportunity to seek a variety of interpretations? Of course. Does it suggest that the downtrodden of Israel, to whom Jesus is speaking (remember – He’s making His journey to Jerusalem, but is not yet there among the movers and shakers; He’s in Judea, across the Jordan), should identify with a landowner? Really? Hardly.
We identify with the landowner, because we – 21st century westerners – have resources and land. The average Palestinian who was listening to Jesus? Riiiight…
The author concludes by writing, “I am not a Christian, but I hear profound messages in these parables. If I as an outsider can be so moved by Jesus’ stories, surely people who worship him as Lord and Savior can appreciate them even more.” She makes a good point: Jesus’ messages are for
everyone. Yet, if she wishes to opine on the Gospels, she would do well to understand a central message found in the Synoptic Gospels: no one – not even the apostles – could hope to understand who Jesus was and what His message truly is, until they’ve witnessed His suffering, death, and resurrection. No one can hope to grasp the Good News until they’ve clung to Jesus as their Lord and Savior. Only then can we hope to understand the message of the Son of God…
