‘ow-men, e.g. the Lost Son, Friend at Midnight, and Unrighteous Steward, οἷο. : (iii.) to Provid- ence ; viz. the Hid Treasure, Pearl of great Price, and Rich Fool. Thus the parables drawn from the relations of man to his fellows (which is not one of the main classes) are the largest group, being about two-thirds of the whole. Secondly, those under the head of man’s relations to Provid- ence might be assigned to man’s relations to the lower world; for to the lower world treasure, pearls, and crops belong. Thirdly, the Tares and the Draw-net seem clearly to belong to the same group; and, if this is admitted, then the two groups to which they are respectively assigned may be merged in one. These changes would give us two main divisions: (i.) Parables drawn from man’s relations to the lower world; and (ii.) parables drawn from man’s relations to his fellows. Nosgen also, in his Gesch. Jesu, Miinchen, 1891, p. 342, makes two main classes, partly on the same lines as Goebel and Godet: (i.) those which treat of the development of the Kingdom as a whole ; and (ii.) those which treat of the lives of individual mem- bers of it. And he regards this classification as indicated by Christ Himself, according as He uses or omits the formula ‘The kingdom of heaven is likened’ (Mt 13% 18% 22? 951), or ‘the kingdom of heaven is like’ (Mt 13%: %- 44. 4- 47 901), or ‘so is the kingdom of God’ (Mk 4%), Comp. Mt 1115, Lk 7", Mk 4, Lk 131-20,
It is probable that the three parables which are in all three Gospels are in some way typical: they are taken from seed-time, growth, and harvest. The Sower tells of the preparation for the kingdom in the hearts of the recipients; the Mustard-seed of its powers of development; and the Wicked Husbandmen of God’s long-suffering mercy and stern judgment upon those who persist in opposing it. But it does not follow from this that a basis for classification is thus indicated.
6. In the Interpretation of Parables we have to be on our guard against the opposite dangers of ignoring important features, and attempting to make all the details mean something. No general rules can be given, for the amount of symbolical detail differs greatly in different parables. This is clear from those cases in which we have Christ’s own interpretations. In the Sower nearly all the features have meaning; not only the seed and the various soils, but the birds, the heat, and the thorns. In the Tares several features are ex-
lained : the sower, the good seed, the enemy, the
es, the field, the harvest, and the reapers. And several are left unexplained : the people sleep- ing, the enemy’s going away, the blade springing up, the servants of the householder, and the bind- ing of the bundles (Mt 13%"), In the Un-
PARACLETE 665
righteous Steward the meaning of the parable as a whole is indicated, viz. the wisdom of using present opportunities as a provision for eternity (Lk 16%); but none of the details are interpreted ; and it is robable that they have no meaning. Most of the ifficulties respecting this parable have been pro- duced by making the separate features of the Sry, mean something, especially the reduction in the bills. Nevertheless, the interpretations of the Sower and of the Tares forbid us to assert that each parable has one main lesson, and that when this is ascertained all the details may be ignored as meaningless. Chrysostom seems to go too far when he declares οὐδὲ χρὴ πάντα τὰ ἐν ταῖς παραβολαῖς κατὰ λέξιν περιεργάζεσθαι, ἀλλὰ τὸν σκοπὸν μαθόντας, δι᾽ ὃν συνετέθη, τοῦτον δρέπεσθαι, καὶ μηδὲν πολυπραγμονεῖν περαιτέρω (in Mt. Hom. Ἰχὶν. 3). But the extravagant lengths to which some patristic commentators go in the interpretation of minute details, especially of numbers (e.g. on Mt 1355 25%, Lk 74 115 137), sprareked strong protests, as from Tertullian (de Pud. 9) and others, who sometimes erred in this way themselves. The question is well handled by Trench, whose third chapter is one of the best in his admirable work, Notes on the Parables, which for English readers is likely to remain the chief guide on the whole subject.
LiTrgraTuRE.—In addition to works mentioned in the above article, the following may be consulted: Lisco, Die Parabeln Jesu, 1832-40, Eng. tr. by Fairbairn, 1840; Buisson, Paraboles de τ Evangile, 1849; Guthrie, The Parables, 1866; Stier, Reden ἃ. Herrn, 1865-74, Eng. tr. by Pope, 1869; Arnot, The Parables of our Lord, 1870; Beyschlag, Die Gleichnissreden ἃ. Herrn, 1875; Thiersch, Die Gleichnisse Christi nach ihrer moral. und
‘ophet. Bedeut, betrachtet, 1875; Bruce, The Parabolic Teach- tng of Christ, 1882 ; Tamm, Der Realismus Jesu in seiner Gleich- nissen, 1886; Jiilicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, 1888, 1899 [see Sanday in Journ. Theol. Stud. Jan. 1900]; Freystedt, Die Gleichnisse ἃ. Herrn, Predigten, 1896 ; Heinrici, art. ‘ Gleich- nisse Jesu’ in PRE%. Most Lives of Christ contain a discussion of the subject. See also Danz, Universalwoérterbuch, p. 727.
A. PLUMMER.
PARACLETE.—This is the English form of the Gr. παράκλητος, paraklétos, which occurs only in the writings of St. John. In Jn 14" 35 15” 167 it is used by Jesus to describe the Holy Spirit, pro- mised to the disciples after His own departure ; and in 1 Jn 2! it is applied by St. John to the ascended Lord Himself. In AV the word is trans- lated ‘Comforter’ in the Gospel and ‘ Advocate’ in the Epistle, without any marginal alternative. In RV these translations are retained, but at each occurrence in the Gospel there is found the marg. note ‘ Or Advocate, or Helper, Gr. Paraclete’ ; and at 1 Jn 91 the note ‘Or Comforter, or Helper, Gr. Paraclete.’ These translations reflect the history of the interpretation of the word in NT. In its reference to Christ the meaning of * Advocate’ has been generally acquiesced in ; but, in its references to the Holy Spirit, it has all along been disputed whether the meaning is Advocate (taken by most in the largest sense, not only Pleader or Defender, but Helper) or Comforter (in the sense of Con- soler).