Why parables?, so we will not understand and be saved?

[Rocinante]

hi, i always found this to be such a strange passage. my conception of jesus as great spiritual teacher is such that he would never deliberately be inscrutable is in his teaching so that people would not be saved by his words. my understanding of what such a great spiritual master is like is that he would have wanted everyone to hear and understand rather than try to speak in a way that people who not understand.

passage below

rocinante

Matthew 13:10–1710 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

11 He replied, “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;

though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

“ ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;

you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.

15 For this people’s heart has become calloused;

they hardly hear with their ears,

and they have closed their eyes.

Otherwise they might see with their eyes,

hear with their ears,

understand with their hearts

and turn, and I would heal them.’

 

[streetpreacher]

Parables have more then one meaning, which gives the reader something more enriching to contemplate. They also are easier to remember and pass on through oral tradition. They also are clear for those with discernment.

The statement/prophesy made describes how the evil one has blinded the people of the world, and to this day, many refuse to come to the truth because they are blinded and deaf to it. Our logic is not theirs, and it’s clear with the parables, another aspect being, at the time, instead of directly confronting the false powers that be, he gave them something to contemplate for themselves, it got the same message across to them, in rebuke to them often, yet allowed Jesus to continue without being dragged off to court.

 

[Rocinante]

Parables have more then one meaning, which gives the reader something more enriching to contemplate. They also are easier to remember and pass on through oral tradition. They also are clear for those with discernment.

those are all good reasons, but jesus gave his reasons and they are not these.

The statement/prophesy made describes how the evil one has blinded the people of the world, and to this day, many refuse to come to the truth because they are blinded and deaf to it.

it doesn’t mention “the evil one”

Our logic is not theirs, and it’s clear with the parables, another aspect being, at the time, instead of directly confronting the false powers that be, he gave them something to contemplate for themselves, it got the same message across to them, in rebuke to them often, yet allowed Jesus to continue without being dragged off to court.

again 'something to contemplate" later for themselves is not the reason jesus gave. the passage says that he spoke in parables so that the people would not understand what he was saying and be saved. apparently he didn’t want them to be saved.

who are the people? presumably in this context anyone but the twelve. but why wouldn’t he want the people to be saved?

rocinante

 

[mcrow]

those are all good reasons, but jesus gave his reasons and they are not these.

it doesn’t mention “the evil one”

again 'something to contemplate" later for themselves is not the reason jesus gave. the passage says that he spoke in parables so that the people would not understand what he was saying and be saved. apparently he didn’t want them to be saved.

who are the people? presumably in this context anyone but the twelve. but why wouldn’t he want the people to be saved?

rocinante

In your last point, you completely misunderstand the verses you quote.

Jesus is clearly saying that his disciples were given the means to understand the parables (Jesus explained them to his disciples) while those (at the time of this verse) he was telling the parables were not. The reason, also clearly stated, is because they were unbelievers and would not believe no matter what he said:

"15 For this people’s heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed,"

I should add that:

" 16 lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them."

IOW, if they truely listen, watch, and opent their hearts to him and ask to be healed (I assume from their spiritual ailment) then they will be given the means to understand. The parables seem to be a sort of test, IMO.

 

[Rocinante]

In your last point, you completely misunderstand the verses you quote.

Jesus is clearly saying that his disciples were given the means to understand the parables (Jesus explained them to his disciples) while those (at the time of this verse) he was telling the parables were not.

ok. i got that much. but the question is why did he not give the people the means to understand that he gave to the twelve?

your answer follows…

The reason, also clearly stated, is because they were unbelievers and would not believe no matter what he said:

"15 For this people’s heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed,"

i’m trying to read it that way, but it doesn’t seem to work. why would he say anything at all if that were the case? he doesn’t seem to say that he didn’t explain the parables to the people as he did to the 12 because the people wouldn’t understand. (how could jesus be incapable of explaining something so that the people could understand?) he doesn’t explain because if he did then they would understand.

he apparently doesn’t want them to explain because if he did these people whose hearts have grown dull “might see with their eyes, hear with their ears,understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.” but i can’t see how that is something that jesus wouldn’t want.

perhaps there is something wrong with the translation, or maybe this passage just doesn’t make sense as was recorded in error.

 

[mcrow]

ok. i got that much. but the question is why did he not give the people the means to understand that he gave to the twelve?

your answer follows…

i’m trying to read it that way, but it doesn’t seem to work. why would he say anything at all if that were the case? he doesn’t seem to say that he didn’t explain the parables to the people as he did to the 12 because the people wouldn’t understand. (how could jesus be incapable of explaining something so that the people could understand?) he doesn’t explain because if he did then they would understand.

he apparently doesn’t want them to explain because if he did these people whose hearts have grown dull “might see with their eyes, hear with their ears,understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.” but i can’t see how that is something that jesus wouldn’t want.

perhaps there is something wrong with the translation, or maybe this passage just doesn’t make sense as was recorded in error.

Ok, nowhere did I or the bible say he was incapable of explaining the parables or that he explained them at all. He may have simply given the 12 the knowledge to understand the parables because they were willing and able to accept him. This is not to say that the parables could not be understood without Jesus helping them out, it was just something they were given, apparently.

“he apparently doesn’t want them to explain”

Who do you mean is “he” and who do mean is “them”? Are you trying to say Jesus does not want the 12 to explain the parables? I really see no evidence of that being said or even hinted at.

First off, the 12 probably didn’t know the parables as well as Jesus, if at all at the time that Jesus was telling them. If they did, they wouldn’t ask him why he was speaking in parables because they would know already that he did this and probably would have asked about it earlier.

These verses seem to point out that the people have a base understanding of the parables but because of their lack of belief they do not see and do not hear the true meaning of the parable.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

I think I have an answer for you, because this is something I struggled with as well. And even if Matthew is ambiguous, the gospel of Mark leaves no doubt that Jesus told parables so they wouldn’t get it. The question is, why? Let’s look at the passage in Matthew that you mentioned first. It makes possible references to a couple passages, Isaiah 6:9 and Jeremiah 5:21.

Isaiah 6:9-11: And he replied: Go and say to this people: Listen carefully, but you shall not understand! Look intently, but you shall know nothing! You are to make the heart of this people sluggish, to dull their ears and close their eyes; Else their eyes will see, their ears hear, their heart understand, and they will turn and be healed. “How long, O Lord?” I asked. And he replied: Until the cities are desolate, without inhabitants, Houses, without a man, and the earth is a desolate waste.

Jeremiah 5:20-25: Announce this to the house of Jacob, proclaim it in Judah: Pay attention to this, foolish and senseless people Who have eyes and see not, who have ears and hear not. Should you not fear me, says the LORD, should you not tremble before me? I made the sandy shore the sea’s limit, which by eternal decree it may not overstep. Toss though it may, it is to no avail; though its billows roar, they cannot pass. But this people’s heart is stubborn and rebellious; they turn and go away, And say not in their hearts, “Let us fear the LORD, our God, Who gives us rain early and late, in its time; Who watches for us over the appointed weeks of harvest.” Your crimes have prevented these things, your sins have turned back these blessings from you.

Now with these parallel passages in mind, let’s read the passage on Pharaoh with a clarifying passage.

Exodus 10:1: Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go in to Pharaoh; for I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants, that I may show these signs of mine among them

In the above, God wants Pharaoh to let His people go, and yet inexplicably hardens his heart. This is clarified, however, by a passage just prior that sheds light on things:

Exodus 9:33-35: So Moses went out of the city from Pharaoh, and stretched out his hands to the LORD; and the thunder and the hail ceased, and the rain no longer poured upon the earth. But when Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunder had ceased, he sinned yet again, and hardened his heart, he and his servants. So the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people of Israel go; as the LORD had spoken through Moses.

So in both sets of passages, we see an interplay between the man’s free will, and God acting in conjunction with his choice. Pharoah hardened himself, so God hardened him as well, but in conjunction with his free will. This an excellent parallel for understanding the first two passages from the prophets, which describe a stubborn, rebellious people, whom God will harden since they have ALREADY turned from Him. Interestingly enough, these passages in the greater context speak of Divine Judgement on Israel. It is significant that Jesus continues this prophetic element by quoting from these passages from the prophets, especially when you take into consideration the Olivet Discourse. He is warning those that are hard-hearted that he will give them over to their sin, and judge Jerusalem, which happened in 70 AD. This is also an interesting indirect allusion to His own divinity, since these words were spoken by God to Israel, and Jesus is using those same words to speak to Jerusalem, applying them to Himself.

Hope that helps, God Bless.

 

[streetpreacher]

but the question is why did he not give the people the means to understand that he gave to the twelve?

Rocinante Religion: Spiritual but not religious

And you are rather a living testimony to your own question and answer about the OP. The Catholic Christian faith has been tried and tested for over 2k years by the multitudes of mankind to be the true faith, the epitome of what God want’s us to follow as believers, yet here you are, posting on this board Religion: Spiritual but not religious… Can you see any correlation to your question and answer here, the church itself not being a simple parable, it’s far more then that, it’s truths are quite transparent for “supposedly” anybody, yet here you are still sitting on the fence about it…asking questions along scripture, still pondering things, you are literally just proving the point here as to why Jesus spoke in parables for yet another reason on top of it. Jesus is God, so what he spoke, God spoke, including all of the hidden, contemplative meanings to boot!!!

The means are there right in front of you, it’s still your own free will to embrace or reject, just as it was with the parables Jesus spoke of.

 

[Pitcharan]

Excerpts from: PARABOLIC REFLECTIONS by PITCHARAN. Copyright 2007 @ I.J.A. Publications, Bangalore. ISBN 81-86778-57-8

I chose the name – Parabolic Reflections for this work and it’s an amazing coincidence that it has a parable contained in it. Thanks to the English language, we have two meanings for the word parabolic and in turn two kinds of parabolic reflections: A parabolic mirror reflects the light placed at its focus as a uniform parallel beam that enables a traveler to clearly see the right path while our Lord’s parables reflect spiritual light in a manner that enables us to clearly see the righteous path.

‘Parables’ are simple daily life happenings, through which Jesus explains deep spiritual mysteries by drawing a parallel with easily understood worldly things.

*The parables of our Lord provoke us to mull over, lead us to light and gently beckon us to be transformed. My efforts to analyse, understand and learn have been an ecstatic experience. I admit that my vocabulary is insufficient to fully describe the experiences; yet let me try and sum up the special features of our Lord’s parabolic method of teaching by recalling from many journeys.

Setting* : The situations chosen are most familiar to the audience – typical and easy to relate. Even for the uneducated and simple lot, the message does not go over the head. Common folk who come to listen are at ease and get absorbed, and the comfort level even encourages the listeners to query more.

Delivery: Leading the audience to a core truth or mystery, is either gradual or instantaneous but has the desired effect in any case. For e.g. “heaven’s joy over a sinner’s conversion” is allowed to gradually descend into the listener’s heart in the parable of the lost (prodigal) son while the same is conveyed rather quickly in the parables of the lost sheep and the lost coin. The message is allowed to seep in deeply by delivering these parables one after another in gentle succession.

Multiple truths: While driving home a particular message, several other beautiful messages are packed which start ringing later when the listener ponders over the whole thing. This is especially so when the message is delivered gradually; moreover the additional messages do not in any way divert the listener’s focus from the main message but rather serve as food for afterthought. As realisation dawns, one is provoked to ponder further, only to be rewarded with reinforcement and many more wondrous truths.

Powerful parallels: The right parallels from the temporal world are picked to explain spiritual truths. As described earlier, the temporal sphere is limited to the common man’s daily life and the effect is tremendously powerful.

Spontaneity: Our Lord never missed an opportunity to teach and rose to the occasion every time. He was spontaneous and not premeditating in his responses; this demonstrated his purity of heart and divine wisdom. While it matched the truth-discerning-grace of the simple hearted the incorrigible-hard-hearted were left untouched. He responded to queries from all types of people: genuine seekers of knowledge, those who sought to justify themselves, those who sought to accuse him of breaking the law, troublemakers out to try and trap him in his own words, sarcastic pseudo-intellects.

 

[zarthan]

Nathan Wagar’s post explains this saying of Jesus Christ as well as anything. It is complete, unified and true to the whole of scripture. Thanks be to God.

 

[Rocinante]

I think I have an answer for you, because this is something I struggled with as well. And even if Matthew is ambiguous, the gospel of Mark leaves no doubt that Jesus told parables so they wouldn’t get it.

that’s a good point. here is the passage in mark:

10When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12so that,
" ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’[a]”

it is very clear here even if one doesn’t think so in matthew that jesus is teaching in parables so that people will NOT understand his teaching and be saved.

 

[Rocinante]

Rocinante Religion: Spiritual but not religious

And you are rather a living testimony to your own question and answer about the OP. The Catholic Christian faith has been tried and tested for over 2k years by the multitudes of mankind to be the true faith, the epitome of what God want’s us to follow as believers, yet here you are, posting on this board Religion: Spiritual but not religious… Can you see any correlation to your question and answer here, the church itself not being a simple parable, it’s far more then that, it’s truths are quite transparent for “supposedly” anybody, yet here you are still sitting on the fence about it…asking questions along scripture, still pondering things, you are literally just proving the point here as to why Jesus spoke in parables for yet another reason on top of it. Jesus is God, so what he spoke, God spoke, including all of the hidden, contemplative meanings to boot!!!

The means are there right in front of you, it’s still your own free will to embrace or reject, just as it was with the parables Jesus spoke of.

i am not sitting on the fence. being spiritual but not religious does not mean that i am not sure which religion has it right. i am confident that all religions have some things right and some things wrong. i am here to extract what wisdom i can from the christian tradition.

 

[mcrow]

that’s a good point. here is the passage in mark:

10When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12so that,
" ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’[a]”

it is very clear here even if one doesn’t think so in matthew that jesus is teaching in parables so that people will NOT understand his teaching and be saved.

No, it’s not. It’s a lot more clear that he has no intention of making it unclear to the listener. As it has been stated before, parables were a common way of teaching at this point in history. So, the concept isn’t something new to the people listening.

The very us of “seeing but never perceiving” “hearing but never understanding” makes that point. Since percieving mean to become aware through the senses and seeing is a sense…

This indicates a disconnect between mind and heart, the see and they hear but reject what he’s saying and don’t believe.

So, looking at that it is clear that Jesus knew that they would not understand but it was not because he was trying to confuse them (parables were a common teaching methiod then) but because their hearts were closed to what he had to say.

Basically, they came, they saw, they listened but failed to grasp the parables becayse they were rejectiing Jesus. However, the apostles obviously believed Jesus was Christ, the son of God and their hearts and minds were open to his teachings.

Also, the Bible makes it pretty clear that God made us to be free, so that we have our own wills and make our own decisions. God lets us make out own decisions for the most part and these people chose not to accept Jesus and thus didn’t understand the parables.

 

[Rocinante]

So, looking at that it is clear that Jesus knew that they would not understand but it was not because he was trying to confuse them (parables were a common teaching methiod then) but because their hearts were closed to what he had to say…

i can understand why you would want that to be the case since that is how we usually think of jesus, but that is not what the text actually says (at least in this translation).

it does not say…

“everything is said in parables because it is already the case that they are ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’”

with those two changes i made there it would be consistent with what you say. but it doesn’t say that. instead it says…

“everything is said in parables so that they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’”

maybe the translation is the issue, but it just doesn’t say what you want it to say.

rocinante

 

[mcrow]

No offense, man, but you’re just going to be one of those people that cannot be convinced of anything that you’ve already made up your mind.

What I and others have said in this thread is what some of the best biblical scholars have said, if that doesn’t convince you then nothing is going to.

Also, if I were you, I’d probably stop analyzing the Bible all together because you seem like the type that can get hung up on small things and the Bible is filled with similar things to this, much of which probably has to do with translation. However, biblical scholars who are able to read the text that the bible was translated from have said pretty much what we’ve said in this thread.

Either way, I hope we’ve been helpful.

 

[streetpreacher]

i am not sitting on the fence. being spiritual but not religious does not mean that i am not sure which religion has it right. i am confident that all religions have some things right and some things wrong. i am here to extract what wisdom i can from the christian tradition.

So, here we are, 2k years with this so called Christian tradition, the multitudes not having a problem with it, the brilliant discerning people from all over the planet, not having a problem with it, and here you are, one person, going to figure out what’s wrong with it for all of us? How does that sound to you, honestly, it’s an arrogant stance, not a humble one to go about it this way. What one doesn’t know about the faith, should be taken by faith, and keep their minds open to what is being taught.

Also, seeing you are mentioning that all religions have some things right? What things?

You claim to be spiritual, even the satanists are spiritual, absolutely not in the proper context, but they are in the same boat as that, you sure you want to continue to remain lumped in with that broad label? This is a common thing that the world, especially the new age movement tends to promote, it’s not at all a good thing and it’s an excuse used by many to ignore tradition, ignore the fundamental truths and teachings and beliefs that have been tried and tested. Until you have submitted to the will of our Lord in full, which includes joining his church, you are wandering, you still have no solid foundation, you are like a cork in the sea, bobbing to and fro as the current takes you…

 

[Rocinante]

So, here we are, 2k years with this so called Christian tradition, the multitudes not having a problem with it, the brilliant discerning people from all over the planet, not having a problem with it, and here you are, one person, going to figure out what’s wrong with it for all of us? How does that sound to you, honestly, it’s an arrogant stance, not a humble one to go about it this way. What one doesn’t know about the faith, should be taken by faith, and keep their minds open to what is being taught.

i disagree. i think when someone doesn’t know something he ought to admit it rather than claiming to know things he doesn’t know.

Also, seeing you are mentioning that all religions have some things right? What things?

You claim to be spiritual, even the satanists are spiritual, absolutely not in the proper context, but they are in the same boat as that, you sure you want to continue to remain lumped in with that broad label?

sure. i don’t feel the need to label myself with regard to my views on religion. i just typed something i thought would apply. to be more specific about my views, i oppose dogmatism and promote rational inquiry and the extension of the concept of reason so that it can deal with values and meaning and a sense of purpose in life.

by the way, you claim to be a prophet. are you are prophet within a particular religious tradition or or you a prophet for a new religion?

This is a common thing that the world, especially the new age movement tends to promote, it’s not at all a good thing and it’s an excuse used by many to ignore tradition, ignore the fundamental truths and teachings and beliefs that have been tried and tested. Until you have submitted to the will of our Lord in full, which includes joining his church, you are wandering, you still have no solid foundation, you are like a cork in the sea, bobbing to and fro as the current takes you…

i don’t feel at all like a cork bobbing around aimlessly in the sea. i feel like a part of the world and engaged in the world for my own betterment and the betterment (i hope) of the rest of the world.

 

[streetpreacher]

i disagree. i think when someone doesn’t know something he ought to admit it rather than claiming to know things he doesn’t know.

What I don’t know, I do not know, nor do I claim to know, and leave it up to the magisterial powers that be to provide the answers relevant necessary as needed. I would rather rely upon the massive volume of individuals, discussion, and testing through the means established by Christ, then upon my own fallible human understanding.

sure. i don’t feel the need to label myself with regard to my views on religion. i just typed something i thought would apply. to be more specific about my views, i oppose dogmatism and promote rational inquiry and the extension of the concept of reason so that it can deal with values and meaning and a sense of purpose in life.

And I am not relying upon my own but others in the same regard, others that have dedicated their lives to discern these very things.

by the way, you claim to be a prophet. are you are prophet within a particular religious tradition or or you a prophet for a new religion?

For you, all you need to understand is that what I am telling you has some weight, it’s not my own human understanding that I rely upon. What I discuss clearly is from this Catholics perspective, In union with the Church, but not necessarily in union for some of the individuals within it.

i don’t feel at all like a cork bobbing around aimlessly in the sea. i feel like a part of the world and engaged in the world for my own betterment and the betterment (i hope) of the rest of the world.

That’s the problem, you are relying upon your feelings, you are looking into self for your guidance. You have no idea how hard it is at times when I face a situation where my feelings are saying one thing, yet I know the truth and it says something else entirely. This is the struggle we all face with those of us that rely upon our faith. When you have no clear direction, at the mercy of your emotions to dictate what you understand, you are indeed bobbing around like a cork in the sea.

It’s like you are taking a trip out in the jungle without a guide, without a map, with a compass that is faulty, and are expecting to make it through without getting lost or killed in the process. One that is wise will have a map, a guide, and the means to get through it safely before they begin the journey.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Getting back to the original discussion…Rocinante, I think, in your quest for truth in this passage, it is always best to keep in mind certain exegetical principles. So whenever Jesus cites an OT passage, looking up that passage within it’s context often gives massive clues to how we can understand not just what Jesus meant, but the larger significance as well. The gospel of Matthew seems to have been written for Jewish audiences, and so is very concerned with Jesus fulfilling Jewish prophecies.

The prophetic contexts of the passages in Isaiah and Jeremiah cannot be ignored, because it speaks of Israel as a whole having turned away, and so God gives them over to their sins (described in greater detail in the entire chapter) and brings Divine Judgment. I showed the passages in Pharaoh not for any direct relevance, but to show another similar example of the interplay between God’s Sovereign grace and man’s free will; he only acts in conjunction with our choice. So in the OT passages we have a stubborn people, and God Himself turns them over to their sins and there is judgement on Jerusalem. Then we have Jesus applying this passage to himself and to the then-current Jerusalem. Again I must stress, when you take this into account with the “Olivet Discourse,” it is really quite a stunning statement, particularly for Jewish ears, and I’m surprised they didn’t try to kill him for it.

I think the problem is that many people here this statement and miss the forrest for the trees. Jesus has a frequent habit of teaching in a focused manner, then broadening to a more universal manner in the next breath. If we take his citations at face value, it appears he is fulfilling prophecy and indicting Jerusalem as a whole, not necessarily the individual listeners. Keep in mind that the Jewish sensibility was strongly corporate, and “individual salvation/damnation” was not as focused on or even seriously considered, by the Jews or the prophets.

Another fascinating implication this has that lends strength to my argument is that Jesus told the parables, and later often explained the meaning in secret to his disciples. So I would argue that he is, indeed, telling parables so that his hearers will not understand, but I would argue that it is hard hearted listeners he is speaking to. Again, think not individuals, but Jerusalem as a whole. Now look at the disciples, who did not harden their hearts. They are explained the full meaning of the parables. This is also especially important given the fact that though both OT passages speak of Judgement, Jeremiah (using the same language) goes on to speak of God asking the “remnant” to be gathered up (6:9, “gleaned” by a “grape gatherer”). So we have Jerusalem, the heard-hearted, destroyed. Then we have the faithful remnant. Keeping in mind the apostles are Jews, and they appear to be the faithful remnant, it appears that yes, Jesus came to the Jews to preach Salvation, but he has really a two-sided ministry. He is gathering up the faithful remnant, and yet judging Jerusalem, as God in the flesh. I would argue that in the very act of “proclaiming the kingdom,” he is also “gathering the remnant” and indicting Jerusalem as a whole. As in the OT, the remnant is what is left and begins over again, hopefully into a sanctified whole again.

So it would seem that Jesus is creating a kingdom on earth by first “getting rid of the filth” (to quote Pope Benedict XVI)

 

[zarthan]

that’s a good point. here is the passage in mark:

10When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12so that,
" ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’[a]”

it is very clear here even if one doesn’t think so in matthew that jesus is teaching in parables so that people will NOT understand his teaching and be saved.

The spiritually proud are oftentimes spiritually blind, and no amount of teaching can turn a proud heart to the place of understanding, repentance and forgiveness. “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble”. Once such hearts are humbled, then they will see what they previously could not see and be forgiven.