What do you think?
Rate this book
The Power of Parable: How Fiction by Jesus Became Fiction about Jesus
The world’s foremost Jesus scholar John Dominic Crossan shows us how the parables present throughout the New Testament not only reveal what Jesus wanted to teach but also provide the key for explaining how the Gospels’ writers sought to explain the Prophet of Nazareth to the world. In this meaningful exploration of the metaphorical stories told by Jesus and the Gospel writers, Crossan combines the biblical expertise of his The Greatest Prayer with a historical and social analysis that harkens closely to his A Revolutionary Biography , creating an illuminating and nuanced exploration of the Scripture that fans of Marcus Borg and Bart Ehrman will find fascinating and essential.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published January 22, 2012
156 people are currently reading
771 people want to read
About the author
John Dominic Crossan
81 books288 followersJohn Dominic Crossan is generally regarded as the leading historical Jesus scholar in the world. He is the author of several bestselling books, including The Historical Jesus, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, The Birth of Christianity, and Who Killed Jesus? He lives in Clermont, Florida.
John Dominic Crossan was born in Nenagh, County Tipperary, Ireland in 1934. He was educated in Ireland and the United States, received a Doctorate of Divinity from Maynooth College in Ireland in 1959, and did post-doctoral research at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome from 1959 to 1961 and at the École Biblique in Jerusalem from 1965 to 1967. He was a member of a thirteenth-century Roman Catholic religious order, the Servites (Ordo Servorum Mariae), from 1950 to 1969 and was an ordained priest in 1957. He joined DePaul University in Chicago in 1969 and remained there until 1995. He is now a Professor Emeritus in its Department of Religious Studies.
John Dominic Crossan was born in Nenagh, County Tipperary, Ireland in 1934. He was educated in Ireland and the United States, received a Doctorate of Divinity from Maynooth College in Ireland in 1959, and did post-doctoral research at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome from 1959 to 1961 and at the École Biblique in Jerusalem from 1965 to 1967. He was a member of a thirteenth-century Roman Catholic religious order, the Servites (Ordo Servorum Mariae), from 1950 to 1969 and was an ordained priest in 1957. He joined DePaul University in Chicago in 1969 and remained there until 1995. He is now a Professor Emeritus in its Department of Religious Studies.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews
January 14, 2020
Ok, my mind is officially blown.
This was not an “easy” book to read. I had two copies of the NRSV spread out so that I could continually reference the verses mentioned in the text. Also, the Apocrypha and The Gospel of St. Thomas are referenced. So if you don’t have copies, get access to them before reading this book.
Everyone who reads this book will have a different perceptions of the text. So if you are a question asker, write the questions down and refer to them during your reading.
If you are able to, discuss this book with others while reading it and get their perspectives as well.
If you do decide to tackle this work, don’t get discouraged. Keep up with it through the end.
This was not an “easy” book to read. I had two copies of the NRSV spread out so that I could continually reference the verses mentioned in the text. Also, the Apocrypha and The Gospel of St. Thomas are referenced. So if you don’t have copies, get access to them before reading this book.
Everyone who reads this book will have a different perceptions of the text. So if you are a question asker, write the questions down and refer to them during your reading.
If you are able to, discuss this book with others while reading it and get their perspectives as well.
If you do decide to tackle this work, don’t get discouraged. Keep up with it through the end.
October 10, 2021
Let's get our priorities straight: John MacArthur has a book called "The Parables of Jesus". Please read THAT instead of anything Crossan has to desperately imply.
Now on to the liberal progressive Ungodly Crap of the Jesus Seminar...
Quote (pg. 251)
"I conclude that Jesus really existed, that we can know the significant sequence of his life...but that he comes to us trailing clouds of fiction, parables by him and about him, particular incidents as miniparables and whole gospels as megaparables."
OH my Goodness that was mind-numbingly stupid - I was excited when I finally got to the last 10 pages. These scribbles should have been called "How to read Jesus as if he were Gandhi - even though the Bible many times shows us otherwise".
I suffered through ANOTHER Jesus-Seminar crap book. (only a few more to go). It's fun observing how these desperate liberal-scholars attempt to undo the Jesus of the Bible. I don't read these books to learn about Jesus but to see how a rebellious warped mind works. Mission successful.
For more insight and fun, I watched Crossan debate with a real theologian (James White) on youtube. Comical chaos ensued. Crossan got spanked like a newborn baby. His twisting and insisting the Bible can not possibly means what it actually says is hilarious and worthy of mockery. James White handled him beautifully. He's a far nicer guy than I am.
I was prepared for this book to be about New Testament parables and what Crossan would like them to be, the problem was: He desperately attempts to turn anything Biblical that he doesn't comprehend OR EMBRACE into a parable. WE are left with thousands of parables in ONE BIG PARABLE collection called The Bible.
And honestly - i'm okay with that. Be a liberal buddhist atheistic guru if it makes you happy. But don't attempt to call it Christianity and insist I swallow it academically. Why do these Jesus-Seminarian's keep insisting they are somehow slightly orthodox Christians??? After reading this book - I still don't know. Their Jesus is in no way worthy of Godly worship or even appreciation as a guru or noble teacher. If Jesus is not divine and God himself - then he is indeed lying and insane. To declare him historic and worthy is just nutty.
____________________
It was amusing watching Crossan not simply look into parables: but start subdividing them and labeling them. Some are Challenge parables, others are Attack parables, or riddles and example parables. That in itself is kind of fun and possibly enlightening, but Crossan insists they are NEVER about Jesus or His eternal Kingdom and salvation. They are apparently about WHATEVER Crossan's imagination can discover.
On the brief positive side:
I did learn about the purpose of Jesus riding a donkey into Jerusalem. I haven't given this much thought - so I enjoyed Crossan stating how non-violent it would appear to have a King show up NOT riding an impressive war horse (Like Jesus does later in Revelation 19). I say ANY prophecy is a good prophecy - even if it shows how humble Jesus can be.
Crossan failed to notice how Holy Spirit inspired this donkey incident is. That's okay, so did all of the religious leaders in Jerusalem at the time.
Which leads to the major issues with John Dominic Crossan's theology:
Is Jesus a Warrior or a Wimp?
For some strange reason Crossan just can't comprehend that Jesus is Loving AND just. He insists Jesus must be either one or the other. Jesus can't be non-violent one day and a conquering King the next. Like most bad theologians - it’s like John Dominic's Bible was missing a few hundred pages. Like some idiot who insists the Baby Jesus can't possibly grow up - let's keep him a cute cuddly baby that we can pamper and control.
But like the Bible says: Jesus came to conquer death and set the people free from sin... then he's coming BACK for Judgement and Kingship. Simply one thing at a time.
______________________
Quote (pg. 251.)
"But could you not get that just as well from a non-historical figure in a magnificent parable? Not really. But why? What is at stake?"
How about conquering DEATH? Or eternal SALVATION? Or a Godly KING setting up His thrown and people? Or simply ALL FOR GOD'S GLORY?
Only a liberal humanist would declare everything spiritual be about US and our wants and progress. Crossan's golden calf is not worth worshiping.
So, Crossan has his heart set that ANYTIME an incident happens twice: It's a parable!
I say simply that God is making his point. Like when Jesus says "Truly, truly...". WE are a slow bunch. Can a lesson happen twice? Definitely. Can a prophecy happen twice? Indeed. Can four Gospel accounts repeat numerous events for clarity? You bet they can.
I honestly think God made the Bible as tricky and fantastic as He did - just to confuse and toy with the Atheists and liberals. Like when Jesus gets to the main point about Parables.
Matthew 13
The Purpose of the Parables
10Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” 11And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 13This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:
“‘“You will indeed hear but never understand,
and you will indeed see but never perceive.”
15For this people’s heart has grown dull,
and with their ears they can barely hear,
and their eyes they have closed,
lest they should see with their eyes
and hear with their ears
and understand with their heart
and turn, and I would heal them.’
16But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. 17For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.
Sorry Crossan, you are included in those WHO HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN. Your book proves that.
Now on to the liberal progressive Ungodly Crap of the Jesus Seminar...
Quote (pg. 251)
"I conclude that Jesus really existed, that we can know the significant sequence of his life...but that he comes to us trailing clouds of fiction, parables by him and about him, particular incidents as miniparables and whole gospels as megaparables."
OH my Goodness that was mind-numbingly stupid - I was excited when I finally got to the last 10 pages. These scribbles should have been called "How to read Jesus as if he were Gandhi - even though the Bible many times shows us otherwise".
I suffered through ANOTHER Jesus-Seminar crap book. (only a few more to go). It's fun observing how these desperate liberal-scholars attempt to undo the Jesus of the Bible. I don't read these books to learn about Jesus but to see how a rebellious warped mind works. Mission successful.
For more insight and fun, I watched Crossan debate with a real theologian (James White) on youtube. Comical chaos ensued. Crossan got spanked like a newborn baby. His twisting and insisting the Bible can not possibly means what it actually says is hilarious and worthy of mockery. James White handled him beautifully. He's a far nicer guy than I am.
I was prepared for this book to be about New Testament parables and what Crossan would like them to be, the problem was: He desperately attempts to turn anything Biblical that he doesn't comprehend OR EMBRACE into a parable. WE are left with thousands of parables in ONE BIG PARABLE collection called The Bible.
And honestly - i'm okay with that. Be a liberal buddhist atheistic guru if it makes you happy. But don't attempt to call it Christianity and insist I swallow it academically. Why do these Jesus-Seminarian's keep insisting they are somehow slightly orthodox Christians??? After reading this book - I still don't know. Their Jesus is in no way worthy of Godly worship or even appreciation as a guru or noble teacher. If Jesus is not divine and God himself - then he is indeed lying and insane. To declare him historic and worthy is just nutty.
____________________
It was amusing watching Crossan not simply look into parables: but start subdividing them and labeling them. Some are Challenge parables, others are Attack parables, or riddles and example parables. That in itself is kind of fun and possibly enlightening, but Crossan insists they are NEVER about Jesus or His eternal Kingdom and salvation. They are apparently about WHATEVER Crossan's imagination can discover.
On the brief positive side:
I did learn about the purpose of Jesus riding a donkey into Jerusalem. I haven't given this much thought - so I enjoyed Crossan stating how non-violent it would appear to have a King show up NOT riding an impressive war horse (Like Jesus does later in Revelation 19). I say ANY prophecy is a good prophecy - even if it shows how humble Jesus can be.
Crossan failed to notice how Holy Spirit inspired this donkey incident is. That's okay, so did all of the religious leaders in Jerusalem at the time.
Which leads to the major issues with John Dominic Crossan's theology:
Is Jesus a Warrior or a Wimp?
For some strange reason Crossan just can't comprehend that Jesus is Loving AND just. He insists Jesus must be either one or the other. Jesus can't be non-violent one day and a conquering King the next. Like most bad theologians - it’s like John Dominic's Bible was missing a few hundred pages. Like some idiot who insists the Baby Jesus can't possibly grow up - let's keep him a cute cuddly baby that we can pamper and control.
But like the Bible says: Jesus came to conquer death and set the people free from sin... then he's coming BACK for Judgement and Kingship. Simply one thing at a time.
______________________
Quote (pg. 251.)
"But could you not get that just as well from a non-historical figure in a magnificent parable? Not really. But why? What is at stake?"
How about conquering DEATH? Or eternal SALVATION? Or a Godly KING setting up His thrown and people? Or simply ALL FOR GOD'S GLORY?
Only a liberal humanist would declare everything spiritual be about US and our wants and progress. Crossan's golden calf is not worth worshiping.
So, Crossan has his heart set that ANYTIME an incident happens twice: It's a parable!
I say simply that God is making his point. Like when Jesus says "Truly, truly...". WE are a slow bunch. Can a lesson happen twice? Definitely. Can a prophecy happen twice? Indeed. Can four Gospel accounts repeat numerous events for clarity? You bet they can.
I honestly think God made the Bible as tricky and fantastic as He did - just to confuse and toy with the Atheists and liberals. Like when Jesus gets to the main point about Parables.
Matthew 13
The Purpose of the Parables
10Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” 11And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 13This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:
“‘“You will indeed hear but never understand,
and you will indeed see but never perceive.”
15For this people’s heart has grown dull,
and with their ears they can barely hear,
and their eyes they have closed,
lest they should see with their eyes
and hear with their ears
and understand with their heart
and turn, and I would heal them.’
16But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. 17For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.
Sorry Crossan, you are included in those WHO HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN. Your book proves that.
May 2, 2015
The more I read from modern scholars about the historical Jesus, the more I realize I don't know very much about Jesus. This book from leading historian John Dominic Crossan is slow starting and there's a bunch of metadiscourse throughout ("first, I will say... then I will say"), but by the end of part one and throughout part two it was all groundbreaking to me.
Crossan's basic assertion is that the gospel writers each had an agenda that deeply colored their interpretation of Jesus's parables and their interpretation of historical events. Crossan leverages a life's worth of study to get to the heart of what was really said and meant in the stories of Jesus, and I find his take convincing. He explains long-held mysteries (e.g., why does Jesus say that he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John the Baptist? Why does he say that the Holy Ghost can't come while he is on the earth?), and he does it in a way that's positive and life-affirming.
Crossan's basic assertion is that the gospel writers each had an agenda that deeply colored their interpretation of Jesus's parables and their interpretation of historical events. Crossan leverages a life's worth of study to get to the heart of what was really said and meant in the stories of Jesus, and I find his take convincing. He explains long-held mysteries (e.g., why does Jesus say that he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John the Baptist? Why does he say that the Holy Ghost can't come while he is on the earth?), and he does it in a way that's positive and life-affirming.
September 11, 2012
The writings of John Dominic Crossan (Professor Emeritus at DePaul University) have sometimes been seen as controversial, but his scholarship is solid and his logic compelling. And there is a danger in reading his many books – the danger that your assumptions about the Biblical text will be challenged. You will hear the text differently and learn about the cultural environment that shaped it; you will encounter questions you never could have imagined before.
Crossan’s latest offering, The Power of Parable, explores parabolic method in the Biblical text. He addresses the Jesus parables, but he also investigates other Biblical parables like Ruth, Jonah and Job. He defines parable but also demonstrates various types of parables in operation in the ancient context as well as the Biblical text.
We most often assume parables are meant to demonstrate right behaviour – a classic example parable of ‘go and do likewise.’ Sometimes they are riddle parables meant to tease our intelligence. But Crossan makes the case that Jesus most often employed challenge parables, a rhetorical device meant to up-end our assumptions and force us to think differently about our world. If repent means to ‘rethink’, then challenge parables were the perfect linguistic tool to invite people to rethink what they thought they knew about matters of faith and politics.
Crossan makes a case that challenge parables were also a highly participatory teaching method that required crowd engagement, so well suited to the collaborative eschatology that Jesus preached and practiced. Parables, in old and new testaments, were meant to challenge and engage us.
The deeper challenge of the book comes in Part 2 when Crossan moves into the discussion of the gospels as parabolic history about Jesus. One gospel at a time, he makes a comprehensive case that we can see the principles of parable at work in the crafting of each book. The gospel writers were men of their time, they wrote within a certain milieu and with their own pastoral agendas – what Walter Brueggemann would call the ‘vested interest’ in each book of the Bible.
John Dominic Crossan certainly takes us into new territory and opens new vistas. We can learn more about parables, about the Gospels and about how we are part of this on-going divine collaboration.
Crossan’s latest offering, The Power of Parable, explores parabolic method in the Biblical text. He addresses the Jesus parables, but he also investigates other Biblical parables like Ruth, Jonah and Job. He defines parable but also demonstrates various types of parables in operation in the ancient context as well as the Biblical text.
We most often assume parables are meant to demonstrate right behaviour – a classic example parable of ‘go and do likewise.’ Sometimes they are riddle parables meant to tease our intelligence. But Crossan makes the case that Jesus most often employed challenge parables, a rhetorical device meant to up-end our assumptions and force us to think differently about our world. If repent means to ‘rethink’, then challenge parables were the perfect linguistic tool to invite people to rethink what they thought they knew about matters of faith and politics.
Crossan makes a case that challenge parables were also a highly participatory teaching method that required crowd engagement, so well suited to the collaborative eschatology that Jesus preached and practiced. Parables, in old and new testaments, were meant to challenge and engage us.
The deeper challenge of the book comes in Part 2 when Crossan moves into the discussion of the gospels as parabolic history about Jesus. One gospel at a time, he makes a comprehensive case that we can see the principles of parable at work in the crafting of each book. The gospel writers were men of their time, they wrote within a certain milieu and with their own pastoral agendas – what Walter Brueggemann would call the ‘vested interest’ in each book of the Bible.
John Dominic Crossan certainly takes us into new territory and opens new vistas. We can learn more about parables, about the Gospels and about how we are part of this on-going divine collaboration.
February 22, 2015
I just finished The Power of Parable: How Fiction by Jesus Became Fiction about Jesus. So many wonder insights... Highly recommended. Crossan ends thus: "The power of Jesus’s parables challenged and enabled his followers to co-create with God a world of justice and love, peace and nonviolence. The power of Jesus’s historical life challenged his followers by proving at least one human being could cooperate fully with God. And if one, why not others? If some, why not all? “Ashes denote,” wrote Emily Dickinson, “that fire was.” And if fire ever was, fire can be again."
4 stars instead of 5 only because of personal stretchy thoughts from him that were either idiosyncratic or impossible for me to decipher. Almost overcome by the fascinating conjecture that the author of the 4th gospel was a SAMARITAN Christian. Makes tons of sense. Thank you. Dr. Crossan!
4 stars instead of 5 only because of personal stretchy thoughts from him that were either idiosyncratic or impossible for me to decipher. Almost overcome by the fascinating conjecture that the author of the 4th gospel was a SAMARITAN Christian. Makes tons of sense. Thank you. Dr. Crossan!
October 29, 2019
This was a very interesting book which makes you think about the message of Jesus. It also shows how the view of the gospel writers influence the message.
April 1, 2022
If you're looking for a book that will help you better understand Jesus's Gospel parables, this is not that book.
Instead, this is literary criticism of the parables. That is, if you were to sign up for a college course on the biblical parables and it was offered in the English department—not the religious studies department—this would be the right kind of textbook.
And it does read like a textbook. It is dense and dry. And at times, it's a real slog. Written by former Roman Catholic priest and New Testament scholar John Dominic Crossan, this book is almost as convoluted as the parables themselves.
Crossan identifies two types of parables in the New Testament:
1. Parables BY Jesus that are fictional events about fictional characters, such as the parable of the Good Samaritan.
2. Parables ABOUT Jesus, such as the resurrected Jesus joining the couple on the road to Emmaus. (For some, these are fightin' words. Crossan purports that all the Resurrection stories are parables.)
He further classifies these two types of parables as being riddles, examples, challenges, or attacks.
But Crossan doesn't stop with the New Testament. He also discusses book-length parables in the Old Testament and how they influenced Jesus's parables, specifically Ruth, Jonah, and Job.
This is not a book for someone who is having a crisis of faith. Crossan purports that the four gospels are essentially book-length "megaparables" about Jesus; in other words, the gospels are fictional stories about real people. He does unequivocally assert that Jesus Christ was a real, historical figure who lived and breathed and was crucified. He also agrees that the four gospels provide a significant sequence of his life, but that much of this is "trailing clouds of fiction," that is, parables by Jesus and about Jesus.
My biggest complaint: Crossan spends an inordinate amount of the book's total word count explaining in great detail what he will soon be explaining, and after he has finally explained whatever it is, he then again summarizes what he just said. It's annoying because it's so excessive. Rather than being something helpful, it's as if he doesn't trust readers to pay attention—so he has to warn us what is coming and then say it all over again at the end. He does it at the beginning and end of each chapter as well as sprinkled throughout each chapter.
Instead, this is literary criticism of the parables. That is, if you were to sign up for a college course on the biblical parables and it was offered in the English department—not the religious studies department—this would be the right kind of textbook.
And it does read like a textbook. It is dense and dry. And at times, it's a real slog. Written by former Roman Catholic priest and New Testament scholar John Dominic Crossan, this book is almost as convoluted as the parables themselves.
Crossan identifies two types of parables in the New Testament:
1. Parables BY Jesus that are fictional events about fictional characters, such as the parable of the Good Samaritan.
2. Parables ABOUT Jesus, such as the resurrected Jesus joining the couple on the road to Emmaus. (For some, these are fightin' words. Crossan purports that all the Resurrection stories are parables.)
He further classifies these two types of parables as being riddles, examples, challenges, or attacks.
But Crossan doesn't stop with the New Testament. He also discusses book-length parables in the Old Testament and how they influenced Jesus's parables, specifically Ruth, Jonah, and Job.
This is not a book for someone who is having a crisis of faith. Crossan purports that the four gospels are essentially book-length "megaparables" about Jesus; in other words, the gospels are fictional stories about real people. He does unequivocally assert that Jesus Christ was a real, historical figure who lived and breathed and was crucified. He also agrees that the four gospels provide a significant sequence of his life, but that much of this is "trailing clouds of fiction," that is, parables by Jesus and about Jesus.
My biggest complaint: Crossan spends an inordinate amount of the book's total word count explaining in great detail what he will soon be explaining, and after he has finally explained whatever it is, he then again summarizes what he just said. It's annoying because it's so excessive. Rather than being something helpful, it's as if he doesn't trust readers to pay attention—so he has to warn us what is coming and then say it all over again at the end. He does it at the beginning and end of each chapter as well as sprinkled throughout each chapter.
January 27, 2021
Somewhat insightful and engagingly written but I don't agree with his theology.
March 19, 2012
Bible Scholar Expands the Importance of Jesus’s Teaching Style
Famous Bible scholar John Dominic Crossan, a popular guide in TV documentaries about the ancient world, hopes his newest book will free more people from the trap of trying to believe that everything in the Bible is literally true. As we follow him in this new tour through the Gospels, Crossan promises a bonus: If we free up our expectations about how the New Testament teaches God’s truth, we may discover fresh inspiration in these time-worn stories.
In a nutshell, here’s how he takes us down this path: What if the world-famous parables of Jesus—the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son and all the rest—weren’t the only parables in the New Testament? What if Jesus’s approach to teaching by telling provocative stories became the over-arching style of early Christian teaching? What if the four Gospel writers actually weren’t trying to nail down every single historical detail about Jesus like modern archaeologists in scientific reports? Instead, what if the Gospel writers’ goal was to tell the most important stories about Jesus in the most memorable and thought-provoking way? After all, that’s how Jesus told his parables. What if the Gospel writers were inspired to shape some of the details in their stories about Jesus to make them the most effective parables about Jesus that they could give to future generations?
At this point, some Christians will be upset with Crossan. If you are among them, then you are likely to have trouble with his new book. If you are a Christian who believes the Bible is true in a literal reading, then this kind of analysis is disturbing. But, before you dismiss this book out of hand, consider this: Crossan is regularly invited into mainline congregations almost every weekend throughout the year, where big crowds of people show up to hear him teach and preach about fresh approaches to understanding the Bible. Through public appearances, television and a long string of books, Crossan’s message has reached millions. It’s worth checking out what he’s saying, this year.
Let me clarify one central point: This new book is not claiming that Jesus is pure fiction. In fact, Crossan clarifies this point himself. He writes: “Did Jesus ever exist as a historical figure in time and place? Is he like Julius Caesar—a factual figure, but enveloped in clouds of parable? Or is he like the Good Samaritan—an entirely fictional character of Christianity’s parabolic imagination? My answer is that Jesus did exist as a historical figure.” And, Crossan sets that final line in italics to make no mistake about this: He’s not trying to deny the truth of Jesus as a real-life figure in history.
Is Crossan out on a limb? For traditional Christian Bible readers, he is. But he has lots of company. Compare his arguments with some of the other popular authors who have new books available about Christianity and the Bible: Christian Smith in The Bible Made Impossible, Diana Butler Bass in Christianity After Religion, and Bart Ehrman in Did Jesus Exist? Of course, they disagree on many points, but they agree on some basic conclusions.
Even if you reject the second half of Crossan’s book, where he argues that the Gospel writers felt it was important to write their Good News in parable formats, you still may find yourself inspired by the book’s first half. That portion of the book is a remarkably fresh reading of Jesus’s own parables. So, my strong recommendation is: Give this book a chance. You’ll find that, in addition to personal inspiration, The Power of Parable is guaranteed to spark spirited discussion in your Sunday School class, Bible study series, or book discussion group.
The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture
Christianity After Religion: The End of Church and the Birth of a New Spiritual Awakening
Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth
Famous Bible scholar John Dominic Crossan, a popular guide in TV documentaries about the ancient world, hopes his newest book will free more people from the trap of trying to believe that everything in the Bible is literally true. As we follow him in this new tour through the Gospels, Crossan promises a bonus: If we free up our expectations about how the New Testament teaches God’s truth, we may discover fresh inspiration in these time-worn stories.
In a nutshell, here’s how he takes us down this path: What if the world-famous parables of Jesus—the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son and all the rest—weren’t the only parables in the New Testament? What if Jesus’s approach to teaching by telling provocative stories became the over-arching style of early Christian teaching? What if the four Gospel writers actually weren’t trying to nail down every single historical detail about Jesus like modern archaeologists in scientific reports? Instead, what if the Gospel writers’ goal was to tell the most important stories about Jesus in the most memorable and thought-provoking way? After all, that’s how Jesus told his parables. What if the Gospel writers were inspired to shape some of the details in their stories about Jesus to make them the most effective parables about Jesus that they could give to future generations?
At this point, some Christians will be upset with Crossan. If you are among them, then you are likely to have trouble with his new book. If you are a Christian who believes the Bible is true in a literal reading, then this kind of analysis is disturbing. But, before you dismiss this book out of hand, consider this: Crossan is regularly invited into mainline congregations almost every weekend throughout the year, where big crowds of people show up to hear him teach and preach about fresh approaches to understanding the Bible. Through public appearances, television and a long string of books, Crossan’s message has reached millions. It’s worth checking out what he’s saying, this year.
Let me clarify one central point: This new book is not claiming that Jesus is pure fiction. In fact, Crossan clarifies this point himself. He writes: “Did Jesus ever exist as a historical figure in time and place? Is he like Julius Caesar—a factual figure, but enveloped in clouds of parable? Or is he like the Good Samaritan—an entirely fictional character of Christianity’s parabolic imagination? My answer is that Jesus did exist as a historical figure.” And, Crossan sets that final line in italics to make no mistake about this: He’s not trying to deny the truth of Jesus as a real-life figure in history.
Is Crossan out on a limb? For traditional Christian Bible readers, he is. But he has lots of company. Compare his arguments with some of the other popular authors who have new books available about Christianity and the Bible: Christian Smith in The Bible Made Impossible, Diana Butler Bass in Christianity After Religion, and Bart Ehrman in Did Jesus Exist? Of course, they disagree on many points, but they agree on some basic conclusions.
Even if you reject the second half of Crossan’s book, where he argues that the Gospel writers felt it was important to write their Good News in parable formats, you still may find yourself inspired by the book’s first half. That portion of the book is a remarkably fresh reading of Jesus’s own parables. So, my strong recommendation is: Give this book a chance. You’ll find that, in addition to personal inspiration, The Power of Parable is guaranteed to spark spirited discussion in your Sunday School class, Bible study series, or book discussion group.
The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture
Christianity After Religion: The End of Church and the Birth of a New Spiritual Awakening
Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth
April 16, 2012
Crossan ponders, “I had observed that the parabolic stories by Jesus seemed remarkably similar to the resurrection stories about Jesus. Were the latter intended as parables just as much as the former? Had we been reading parable, presuming history, and misunderstanding both?”
In other words, are the stories of Jesus really book-length parables? Crossan presents three such parables in the Old Testament: Job, Ruth and Jonah. Ruth challenges a part of the Bible, Jonah challenges the whole of the Bible, and Job challenges the God of the Bible. But isn’t there a major difference between the Old Testament books and the Gospels? Were the characters in these stories historical, the way we think of Jesus? So Crossan presents the story of Caesar at the Rubicon as “parabolic history” to show how even historical characters can be the subject of the development of parables.
Crossan separates parables by their flavor: riddle, example, challenge, and attack parables. I found the discussion of several New Testament parables insightful, but they served only as a lead-in to the bigger topic. In part 2, Crossan takes on the four Gospels each as a whole, presenting the meaning of them as book-length parables … what they challenge, what they attack.
It is not really the historicity of the Gospels which Crossan contests, but their evangelical purpose. The undercurrent of truth, or lack thereof, is not the focus of his book; it is the way the stories are bent into parable, and what these book-length parables mean. Thought-provoking and well-written, a great read.
In other words, are the stories of Jesus really book-length parables? Crossan presents three such parables in the Old Testament: Job, Ruth and Jonah. Ruth challenges a part of the Bible, Jonah challenges the whole of the Bible, and Job challenges the God of the Bible. But isn’t there a major difference between the Old Testament books and the Gospels? Were the characters in these stories historical, the way we think of Jesus? So Crossan presents the story of Caesar at the Rubicon as “parabolic history” to show how even historical characters can be the subject of the development of parables.
Crossan separates parables by their flavor: riddle, example, challenge, and attack parables. I found the discussion of several New Testament parables insightful, but they served only as a lead-in to the bigger topic. In part 2, Crossan takes on the four Gospels each as a whole, presenting the meaning of them as book-length parables … what they challenge, what they attack.
It is not really the historicity of the Gospels which Crossan contests, but their evangelical purpose. The undercurrent of truth, or lack thereof, is not the focus of his book; it is the way the stories are bent into parable, and what these book-length parables mean. Thought-provoking and well-written, a great read.
April 26, 2013
For people who enjoy John Dominic Crossan at his most thoughtful and scholarly best this will be a delight to read. The importance of parables in the four gospels of the New Testament has been a reoccurring theme in his works since “In Parables: The Challenge of the Historical Jesus” which was first published in 1973. In “The Power of the Parable,” he concludes that gospels according to Matthew, Mark , Luke and John are mega-parables about the historical Jesus who himself used parables as a teaching tool.
Crossan does this in the right way. First he describes different types of parables: riddle, example, challenge and attack. Of the four, Crossan posits that challenge parables were used by the historical Jesus as a non-violent pedagogical tool that was thought provoking as well as provocative to listeners in Roman-occupied Palestine. He effectively show how Jesus and the later gospel writers could draw on a challenge parable tradition in the Jewish bible-particularly the books of Ruth, Jonah and Job. Then he shows how each gospel can be seen as either a challenge or as an attack parable against another group that concerned the gospel writer.
Finally he underlines the real message of the historical Jesus to the people of his time and place. I recommend this book to readers who are interested in the life and times of the historical Jesus and of the gospel writers who later wrote about his ministry.
Crossan does this in the right way. First he describes different types of parables: riddle, example, challenge and attack. Of the four, Crossan posits that challenge parables were used by the historical Jesus as a non-violent pedagogical tool that was thought provoking as well as provocative to listeners in Roman-occupied Palestine. He effectively show how Jesus and the later gospel writers could draw on a challenge parable tradition in the Jewish bible-particularly the books of Ruth, Jonah and Job. Then he shows how each gospel can be seen as either a challenge or as an attack parable against another group that concerned the gospel writer.
Finally he underlines the real message of the historical Jesus to the people of his time and place. I recommend this book to readers who are interested in the life and times of the historical Jesus and of the gospel writers who later wrote about his ministry.
September 4, 2012
This is an excellent book for anyone wanting a deeper and more thorough grasp of the Christian Bible. Crossan has spent his prodigious career studying the 'historic' Jesus and does a wonderful job of contexting the Christian Biblical writings to their time and place in Roman and earlier history.
If you are a fundamentalist 'the Bible is the inerrant, literal word' type, then this book is not for you. But if you want to understand the thrust of the philosophy and message in a way that does not require you to believe in magic or dismiss your sense of reason, this is a superb and accessible read.
If you are a fundamentalist 'the Bible is the inerrant, literal word' type, then this book is not for you. But if you want to understand the thrust of the philosophy and message in a way that does not require you to believe in magic or dismiss your sense of reason, this is a superb and accessible read.
August 31, 2016
This book has a deplorably bad writing style. Perhaps a direct transcript from a lecture but does not lend it well in book form. I can't get pass the smug "I will tell you -- I am telling you -- Just as I told you earlier" professorial tone of condescension. The parables are intriguing by themselves, but I do not have enough trust in the author to be led gently into their mysteries. I need a more generous author to understand the parables in Bible instead spending much time cringing from the knowing self-congratulatory tone of the author.
May 19, 2021
2/5 stars
“From literal to metaphorical register and from specific microcosm to general macrocosm, ‘away-from-here’ is the destination of any parable.”
I want to preface this by saying that I don’t want this to come across as a personal attack on Crossan. He has a talent for writing, and he has a lot of experience in the field of New Testament studies. He even makes some good points! But I will be honest and admit that Crossan’s involvement in the Jesus Seminar made me a little skeptical going in. (Long story, check out the Jesus Seminar on Wikipedia if you’ve never heard of it!) And in the end, the book didn’t really resonate with me. At the risk of this turning into a full-length academic review, I will try to keep my thoughts as brief as possible!
Crossan examines the Gospels as “megaparables” about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus (6). In his own definition, a parable is a “metaphorical story” which “points externally beyond itself” (8). He identifies four different types of parables—riddle, example, challenge, and attack parables—with each of the four Gospels fitting into either the “challenge” or “attack” category. But in doing so, he gives the impression that the four Gospels are actually about anything other than telling the story of salvation through Jesus—they’re actually full-fledged attacks against Jews or challenges against Rome, they’re actually about nonviolent resistance, etc. Those elements are present, but I don’t think they constitute the purpose of the Gospels. There doesn’t seem to be anything supernatural left to Jesus at all in this view. At the end of the book, Crossan even asks whether it really matters at all to Christianity whether Jesus was a real historical figure or not. He would answer yes—but only because Jesus’ life proved that “at least one human being could cooperate fully with God” (252). I would argue that there is MUCH more at stake in the historical existence of Jesus than just that. Like, for example, the entire Christian mission and worldview. Crossan’s Jesus is a wise teacher, but not much else. This kind of image of Jesus may be popular, but in my opinion, it is ultimately vacuous.
Crossan makes very good points, at times, and often brings up interesting food for thought. However, I think he stretches his conclusions a bit too far most of the time. Regarding what we know as the parable of the good Samaritan (from Luke 10), Crossan suggests that the idea of a “good Samaritan” has become a mere cliché in the 21st century; the challenge of a Samaritan helping a Jew is often lost on modern readers. True! I think it’s important to consider the historical context of this parable. But his statement that “one wonders why this [challenge] was not clearly obvious throughout almost two millennia of Christian tradition—or even for Luke himself” is, frankly, arrogant (60). Crossan insists that Luke changed the parable from a challenge to an example. But why couldn’t the story be both an example and a challenge? And how does he know that Luke didn’t realize that a Samaritan helping a Jew was challenging? It seems to me that Luke would have known, because he places a parable with a Samaritan hero just one chapter after the Samaritans reject Jesus and the disciples (9:52-56). And to say that nobody in the 2000-year history of Christianity has ever understood this until now? That doesn’t seem like a fair statement to make either. Some of his other conclusions struck the wrong chord with me as well. A notable example is his insistence that Jesus is portrayed as “rhetorically violent” when he calls the Pharisees hypocrites in the Gospel of Matthew (186). Is calling someone a hypocrite really rhetorical violence? Aren’t there situations where it’s wholly necessary to call out hypocrisy? And can’t you call it out while also praying for and loving a person? It’s as if Crossan is saying, “hey, I get that Jesus was challenging, but not that challenging!”
I will stop here before I go on too long—the main point is that Crossan’s skeptical point of view on the Scriptures is not very helpful to me in the long run. He brings up some good points and rightly highlights the challenging aspects of the Gospels (and the Bible in general), but shies away from what I would call the greatest challenge put forth by the New Testament—that Jesus is the Son of God.
“From literal to metaphorical register and from specific microcosm to general macrocosm, ‘away-from-here’ is the destination of any parable.”
I want to preface this by saying that I don’t want this to come across as a personal attack on Crossan. He has a talent for writing, and he has a lot of experience in the field of New Testament studies. He even makes some good points! But I will be honest and admit that Crossan’s involvement in the Jesus Seminar made me a little skeptical going in. (Long story, check out the Jesus Seminar on Wikipedia if you’ve never heard of it!) And in the end, the book didn’t really resonate with me. At the risk of this turning into a full-length academic review, I will try to keep my thoughts as brief as possible!
Crossan examines the Gospels as “megaparables” about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus (6). In his own definition, a parable is a “metaphorical story” which “points externally beyond itself” (8). He identifies four different types of parables—riddle, example, challenge, and attack parables—with each of the four Gospels fitting into either the “challenge” or “attack” category. But in doing so, he gives the impression that the four Gospels are actually about anything other than telling the story of salvation through Jesus—they’re actually full-fledged attacks against Jews or challenges against Rome, they’re actually about nonviolent resistance, etc. Those elements are present, but I don’t think they constitute the purpose of the Gospels. There doesn’t seem to be anything supernatural left to Jesus at all in this view. At the end of the book, Crossan even asks whether it really matters at all to Christianity whether Jesus was a real historical figure or not. He would answer yes—but only because Jesus’ life proved that “at least one human being could cooperate fully with God” (252). I would argue that there is MUCH more at stake in the historical existence of Jesus than just that. Like, for example, the entire Christian mission and worldview. Crossan’s Jesus is a wise teacher, but not much else. This kind of image of Jesus may be popular, but in my opinion, it is ultimately vacuous.
Crossan makes very good points, at times, and often brings up interesting food for thought. However, I think he stretches his conclusions a bit too far most of the time. Regarding what we know as the parable of the good Samaritan (from Luke 10), Crossan suggests that the idea of a “good Samaritan” has become a mere cliché in the 21st century; the challenge of a Samaritan helping a Jew is often lost on modern readers. True! I think it’s important to consider the historical context of this parable. But his statement that “one wonders why this [challenge] was not clearly obvious throughout almost two millennia of Christian tradition—or even for Luke himself” is, frankly, arrogant (60). Crossan insists that Luke changed the parable from a challenge to an example. But why couldn’t the story be both an example and a challenge? And how does he know that Luke didn’t realize that a Samaritan helping a Jew was challenging? It seems to me that Luke would have known, because he places a parable with a Samaritan hero just one chapter after the Samaritans reject Jesus and the disciples (9:52-56). And to say that nobody in the 2000-year history of Christianity has ever understood this until now? That doesn’t seem like a fair statement to make either. Some of his other conclusions struck the wrong chord with me as well. A notable example is his insistence that Jesus is portrayed as “rhetorically violent” when he calls the Pharisees hypocrites in the Gospel of Matthew (186). Is calling someone a hypocrite really rhetorical violence? Aren’t there situations where it’s wholly necessary to call out hypocrisy? And can’t you call it out while also praying for and loving a person? It’s as if Crossan is saying, “hey, I get that Jesus was challenging, but not that challenging!”
I will stop here before I go on too long—the main point is that Crossan’s skeptical point of view on the Scriptures is not very helpful to me in the long run. He brings up some good points and rightly highlights the challenging aspects of the Gospels (and the Bible in general), but shies away from what I would call the greatest challenge put forth by the New Testament—that Jesus is the Son of God.
April 26, 2024
This author refers to many aspects of spiritual texts (Jewish and Christian) and then calls them parables and goes even further to change meaning ascribed to them from within scripture.
References to the gospel of Thomas as well as the apocrypha are made many times but are extremely selective and interpreted very loosely by Crossan.
I had a very hard discerning if the author was in fact a Christian or not.
References to the gospel of Thomas as well as the apocrypha are made many times but are extremely selective and interpreted very loosely by Crossan.
I had a very hard discerning if the author was in fact a Christian or not.
February 18, 2025
Very very interesting perspective. My Bible study is going through the parables in Matthew, and when I was in the library this book caught my attention because it claimed Jesus’ parables as fiction. Although my beliefs do not align with the theology of the author, it was fascinating to read a different perspective and expand on my own knowledge of the parables.
September 29, 2022
One of my favorite biblical studies books ever. I’m inspired to read the rest of Crossan’s works.
September 30, 2022
My only regret is reading it via Kindle instead of having a paperback to hold. I love how Crossan thinks and make me think in return. Utterly brilliant.
July 7, 2025
“The power of the challenge parable is the power of nonviolent rhetoric to oppose violence without joining it.”
Once again Crossan leaves me with a lifetime of things to think about and be challenged by. A riveting book that shows how truly impactful stories and metaphors can be.
Once again Crossan leaves me with a lifetime of things to think about and be challenged by. A riveting book that shows how truly impactful stories and metaphors can be.
January 15, 2023
Crossan argues that the historical Jesus taught in challenge parables. Crossan defines challenge parables as stories that inspire listener participation and challenge the the listener's assumptions about social hierarchy, the existing economic order, and ethnic stereotypes.
Jesus' original parables were radically nonviolent challenge parables, but the writers who wrote the gospels many decades after his death changed his words and context to suit their own political and religious agendas. Matthew and Luke both drew on the Q gospel as their source material, and their embellishments can best be understood when placed in relief next to the gospel of Mark, written closest to Jesus' own time. Mark's Jesus preaches an eschatology that is non-violent, and his challenge parables never become attack parables, i.e. parables that use language to name call, dehumanize, or threaten the other. Crossan points out that violent language seeds violent behavior and genocide, and he traces the Holocaust directly to the anti-semitic language found in Matthew, Luke and John.
Matthew, Luke and John all contort the original parables into attack parables, but they attack different people for their different purposes. Luke, a gentile turned Christian, attacks the Jews from the perspective of an outsider. His aim is to convince Rome that the Christians should be granted the privileges historically enjoyed by Jews because the Christians are the theological successors to Judaism. As the author of both Luke and Acts, Luke argues that the Holy Spirit ties Paul to Jesus and that therefore Rome, Paul's final destination, is the new Jerusalem--Christianity's new holy city.
Matthew attacks the Jews from the perspective of a Jew turned Christian. His attack parables dehumanize the pharisees and traditional Jewish leadership.
John, in contrast, attacks the Jews most viciously of all--perhaps from the perspective of a Samaritan turned Christian. His Jesus is written exclusively as an omniscient, omnipotent God and shows none of the humanity or vulnerability found in earlier gospels. (For example, Mark's Jesus pleads that the cup pass from him, whereas John's Jesus understands from the outset the inevitability of his own suffering.)
During Jesus's time, leaders of violent uprisings were killed alongside all of their followers, whereas leaders of non-violent protests were killed alone. Jesus's contemporaries understood Jesus to be preaching a message that undermined socio-economic and ethnic orders, but everyone understood this message as a non-violent one. If Jesus had preached violence, Roman law would have ensured the death of all of Jesus's followers alongside Jesus. In the case of non-violent protesters like Jesus, Rome executed the leader alone.
The importance of Crossan's argument can not be emphasized enough. People professing Christianity as a religion must take the time to understand the historical context of Jesus and his radically non-violent message.
Beyond that, the insights this book give into the historical context of the biblical parables are just amazing. Jesus's challenge parables are of course precedented by Old Testament challenge parables such as Ruth, Jonah, and the ultimate challenge parable--Job. These challenge parables upended the fundamentalist movements of their time by questioning prevailing letter-of-the-law mindsets. Jesus's parables were modeled after these radical stories.
For example, Ruth was written at the time that Ezra, Nehemiah and the Deuteronomists were insisting that their biblical law be interpreted literally. These religious zealots were demanding that all Jewish men divorce their non-Jewish wives and cast off their children. Ruth gently reminds the zealots that David's grandmother was a Moabite. Jonah takes that one step further by humanizing the Assyrians, who had oppressed, killed, raped and plundered Israel. The book of Jonah asserts that Jewish prophets can be silly and absurd while those who oppress Israel are, in fact, worthy of salvation.
And Job takes the challenge parable to its ultimate point, making Job the Edomite (not an Israelite) the holiest man on earth. In the book of Job the fools are given all their lines in gorgeous poetry, while God and Job speak in less seductive prose. Ultimately the book of Job serves to sever Job's God from Deuteronomy entirely--and also forces the attentive reader to consider whether God himself is even just.
Similarly, Jesus uses challenge parables to force his hearers to consider the justice of the prevailing socio-economic systems. For example, his parable about the master going out to hire laborers throughout the day would have been understood to be a scathing critique of those who owned land and capital. The master could have hired all of the laborers who wanted work at the beginning of the day, but instead he was, in Crossan's historically contextualized analysis, a "cheapskate" who went out hour by hour hiring as few people as he could to get the job done. At 6pm he insults the laborers still waiting to be hired by asking them why they haven't been working all day, and their restrained reply is that "no one has hired them." The master has the all of the power, the money, and the ability to distribute money unjustly, which he does. Contemporary hearers would have understood this parable as an economic critique.
Christians have been so used to understanding pharisees as the New Testament "bad guys" that the context for Jesus's parables about pharisees have also lost much original context. Jesus's followers believed the pharisees to be the very holiest religious leaders. Crossan points out that to Jesus's hearers, the parable about the pharisee and the tax collector going to the temple to pray together would have been shocking--akin to hearing someone start out a story by saying "a prophet and a pimp went together to the temple to pray." The idea that the pimp is more righteous than the prophet would be borderline blasphemous to any Christians who seriously believe in prophets, and yet Jesus's message was just that.
I could go on and on about how this book upends common takeaways from the parables of Jesus. It turns out the parables aren't tritely moralistic. They are dynamic, subtle, engaging, and continually relevant. As a reader who feels ambivalent about Christianity, I could not put the book down. It was a fascinating and humbling read.
Jesus' original parables were radically nonviolent challenge parables, but the writers who wrote the gospels many decades after his death changed his words and context to suit their own political and religious agendas. Matthew and Luke both drew on the Q gospel as their source material, and their embellishments can best be understood when placed in relief next to the gospel of Mark, written closest to Jesus' own time. Mark's Jesus preaches an eschatology that is non-violent, and his challenge parables never become attack parables, i.e. parables that use language to name call, dehumanize, or threaten the other. Crossan points out that violent language seeds violent behavior and genocide, and he traces the Holocaust directly to the anti-semitic language found in Matthew, Luke and John.
Matthew, Luke and John all contort the original parables into attack parables, but they attack different people for their different purposes. Luke, a gentile turned Christian, attacks the Jews from the perspective of an outsider. His aim is to convince Rome that the Christians should be granted the privileges historically enjoyed by Jews because the Christians are the theological successors to Judaism. As the author of both Luke and Acts, Luke argues that the Holy Spirit ties Paul to Jesus and that therefore Rome, Paul's final destination, is the new Jerusalem--Christianity's new holy city.
Matthew attacks the Jews from the perspective of a Jew turned Christian. His attack parables dehumanize the pharisees and traditional Jewish leadership.
John, in contrast, attacks the Jews most viciously of all--perhaps from the perspective of a Samaritan turned Christian. His Jesus is written exclusively as an omniscient, omnipotent God and shows none of the humanity or vulnerability found in earlier gospels. (For example, Mark's Jesus pleads that the cup pass from him, whereas John's Jesus understands from the outset the inevitability of his own suffering.)
During Jesus's time, leaders of violent uprisings were killed alongside all of their followers, whereas leaders of non-violent protests were killed alone. Jesus's contemporaries understood Jesus to be preaching a message that undermined socio-economic and ethnic orders, but everyone understood this message as a non-violent one. If Jesus had preached violence, Roman law would have ensured the death of all of Jesus's followers alongside Jesus. In the case of non-violent protesters like Jesus, Rome executed the leader alone.
The importance of Crossan's argument can not be emphasized enough. People professing Christianity as a religion must take the time to understand the historical context of Jesus and his radically non-violent message.
Beyond that, the insights this book give into the historical context of the biblical parables are just amazing. Jesus's challenge parables are of course precedented by Old Testament challenge parables such as Ruth, Jonah, and the ultimate challenge parable--Job. These challenge parables upended the fundamentalist movements of their time by questioning prevailing letter-of-the-law mindsets. Jesus's parables were modeled after these radical stories.
For example, Ruth was written at the time that Ezra, Nehemiah and the Deuteronomists were insisting that their biblical law be interpreted literally. These religious zealots were demanding that all Jewish men divorce their non-Jewish wives and cast off their children. Ruth gently reminds the zealots that David's grandmother was a Moabite. Jonah takes that one step further by humanizing the Assyrians, who had oppressed, killed, raped and plundered Israel. The book of Jonah asserts that Jewish prophets can be silly and absurd while those who oppress Israel are, in fact, worthy of salvation.
And Job takes the challenge parable to its ultimate point, making Job the Edomite (not an Israelite) the holiest man on earth. In the book of Job the fools are given all their lines in gorgeous poetry, while God and Job speak in less seductive prose. Ultimately the book of Job serves to sever Job's God from Deuteronomy entirely--and also forces the attentive reader to consider whether God himself is even just.
Similarly, Jesus uses challenge parables to force his hearers to consider the justice of the prevailing socio-economic systems. For example, his parable about the master going out to hire laborers throughout the day would have been understood to be a scathing critique of those who owned land and capital. The master could have hired all of the laborers who wanted work at the beginning of the day, but instead he was, in Crossan's historically contextualized analysis, a "cheapskate" who went out hour by hour hiring as few people as he could to get the job done. At 6pm he insults the laborers still waiting to be hired by asking them why they haven't been working all day, and their restrained reply is that "no one has hired them." The master has the all of the power, the money, and the ability to distribute money unjustly, which he does. Contemporary hearers would have understood this parable as an economic critique.
Christians have been so used to understanding pharisees as the New Testament "bad guys" that the context for Jesus's parables about pharisees have also lost much original context. Jesus's followers believed the pharisees to be the very holiest religious leaders. Crossan points out that to Jesus's hearers, the parable about the pharisee and the tax collector going to the temple to pray together would have been shocking--akin to hearing someone start out a story by saying "a prophet and a pimp went together to the temple to pray." The idea that the pimp is more righteous than the prophet would be borderline blasphemous to any Christians who seriously believe in prophets, and yet Jesus's message was just that.
I could go on and on about how this book upends common takeaways from the parables of Jesus. It turns out the parables aren't tritely moralistic. They are dynamic, subtle, engaging, and continually relevant. As a reader who feels ambivalent about Christianity, I could not put the book down. It was a fascinating and humbling read.
March 6, 2017
Well, this has forever changed the way I view the Bible and it's stories. Can't say that it answers any questions per se. More like it raises a few more. It does put things in the historical period and society viewpoints of the time which is what is lacking in contemporary religious teachings and interpretations. The Good Samaritan story is one of the most enlightening.
Crossan views the Bible more as a collection of stories rather than literal occurrences. And at times, it seems he is overreaching in order to make it fit his point of view rather than just the plain facts...of which I am skeptical of anyway. I mean, how many FACTS can you prove from that time period.
One thing he has done though is a LOT of historical research and chronology. Whew! These people must never come up for air! Takes a special dedication.
Crossan views the Bible more as a collection of stories rather than literal occurrences. And at times, it seems he is overreaching in order to make it fit his point of view rather than just the plain facts...of which I am skeptical of anyway. I mean, how many FACTS can you prove from that time period.
One thing he has done though is a LOT of historical research and chronology. Whew! These people must never come up for air! Takes a special dedication.
December 23, 2019
The non-violent Jesus
One of the best books I have ever read. The explanations were so clear and amazing. I enjoyed reading about the external and internal proofs of Jesus' existence. I would like to hear more about why the author believes John might have been a Samaritan. His explanation certainly made sense. Wonderful book!
One of the best books I have ever read. The explanations were so clear and amazing. I enjoyed reading about the external and internal proofs of Jesus' existence. I would like to hear more about why the author believes John might have been a Samaritan. His explanation certainly made sense. Wonderful book!
July 3, 2018
.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 24, 2018
“Do not, then, ever hear any of the specific names or classes or acts or episodes in the parables of Jesus with modern Christian ears; try to use ancient Jewish ears.” – Page 100 e-edition.
This quote sums up Crossan’s “The Power of Parables”. What you’ve been reading all these years and what you thought they meant, you were probably wrong. Whereas many can be read as setting examples like the Good Samaritan, Crossan makes the case these stories were meant to challenge current thinking. For instance, in the story of the Master’s Money where the two who invested were rewarded when the Master returned, and the third who did not was chastised, the story to modern ears suggests you should create wealth from wealth. But this is not a Jewish value. In the Torah, generating interest is forbidden. Crossan argues the Master’s Money parable is better read as a story presented to the audience to get the debate going as to what is better: God’s way (no interest)? Or the way of Rome (interest)?
Citing the story of Ruth, Jonah and Job from the Old Testament, Crossan makes the case that “challenge” was more the goal than example or otherwise. He argues that simply reading the parables isn’t enough. Imagine in their original form, they were spoken by a teacher. The parable could have taken an hour to generate discussion with constant objections and interruptions. This does not translate when written and the meaning gets lost.
Crossan, of course, invested in the historical Jesus as he is, figures these parables were spoken by Jesus and discussed for lengths of time. I, however, being more convinced of the mythicist persuasion (that there never was a historical Jesus) can still accept Crossan’s conclusions but that the New Testament parables were told and discussed by the first Christians, not Jesus. The first Christians were feeling their way around their new faith using the familiar Jewish formula of parable. In their belief that Jesus died and resurrected as a replacement of the Temple and yearly sacrifice of the sin of Israel, they discussed this new view of the world by challenging the old. What remains of these discussions, all we have left, are what were later boxed into the Gospels and the words put into Jesus’ mouth. And the meaning gets further convoluted due to what being left is only in written form. It would be interesting to see some turned into stage plays to demonstrate what the parables would have been.
This sums up the first six chapters of “The Power of Parable”.
The rest of the book makes up not what Jesus/Christians were talking about, but what parables were told about Jesus himself (the four Gospels and Book of Acts).
For Mark, Jesus was to represent a Jewish and Gentile community, not just Jewish in Jerusalem. Also for Mark, the unnamed were held to higher esteem than the named. The purpose appears to usurp the authority of the Twelve Apostles and a growing hierarchy.
For Matthew, Jesus was a Christian Jew usurping Pharisaic Judaism. Matthew appears to be writing from inside Judaism but attempting to supplant it.
For Luke-Acts, it attacked Judaism by promoting the Gentile and was an attempt to sell Christianity to Rome, to usurp any Jewish privilege. It appears this Gospel was already outside Judaism.
And then John, it was an attack on Judaism perhaps coming from the outside, perhaps from a Samaritan tradition. And most importantly, it's the only Gospel where Jesus is boss of the cross, he dictates everything that's going to happen and has foresight about it.
The most interesting part of this book was between parts one and two. It was the Interlude. In between the discussion of the parables told by Jesus and the parables about Jesus, Crossan discusses seven different authors/historians to old who told of the crossing of the Rubicon by Julius Caesar. He notes that the first were told as matters of fact, some not even mentioning the river by name. However later authors embellished, created mythological elements like, in the case of Lucan’s telling of the crossing, a “being of wondrous stature and beauty, who sat and played upon a reed…” snatched a trumpet from one of Caesar’s trumpeters and was the first to cross showing the way.
What’s interesting about this is how, unlike the matter of fact historical recounting of Caesar’s invasion of Rome, we have no matter of fact historical accounts of Jesus. All we have is parable. This is one of the indications to me that there never was a historical Jesus just as there never was a “being of wondrous stature and beauty” who led Caesar and his army across the Rubicon. But Crossan ends this book by giving reasons he still thinks there was a historical figure behind the parable. I won't dissect that here, it isn't entirely relevant. For what we'd at least both agree on, is that if there ever was a historical Jesus, that person is lost to history.
This quote sums up Crossan’s “The Power of Parables”. What you’ve been reading all these years and what you thought they meant, you were probably wrong. Whereas many can be read as setting examples like the Good Samaritan, Crossan makes the case these stories were meant to challenge current thinking. For instance, in the story of the Master’s Money where the two who invested were rewarded when the Master returned, and the third who did not was chastised, the story to modern ears suggests you should create wealth from wealth. But this is not a Jewish value. In the Torah, generating interest is forbidden. Crossan argues the Master’s Money parable is better read as a story presented to the audience to get the debate going as to what is better: God’s way (no interest)? Or the way of Rome (interest)?
Citing the story of Ruth, Jonah and Job from the Old Testament, Crossan makes the case that “challenge” was more the goal than example or otherwise. He argues that simply reading the parables isn’t enough. Imagine in their original form, they were spoken by a teacher. The parable could have taken an hour to generate discussion with constant objections and interruptions. This does not translate when written and the meaning gets lost.
Crossan, of course, invested in the historical Jesus as he is, figures these parables were spoken by Jesus and discussed for lengths of time. I, however, being more convinced of the mythicist persuasion (that there never was a historical Jesus) can still accept Crossan’s conclusions but that the New Testament parables were told and discussed by the first Christians, not Jesus. The first Christians were feeling their way around their new faith using the familiar Jewish formula of parable. In their belief that Jesus died and resurrected as a replacement of the Temple and yearly sacrifice of the sin of Israel, they discussed this new view of the world by challenging the old. What remains of these discussions, all we have left, are what were later boxed into the Gospels and the words put into Jesus’ mouth. And the meaning gets further convoluted due to what being left is only in written form. It would be interesting to see some turned into stage plays to demonstrate what the parables would have been.
This sums up the first six chapters of “The Power of Parable”.
The rest of the book makes up not what Jesus/Christians were talking about, but what parables were told about Jesus himself (the four Gospels and Book of Acts).
For Mark, Jesus was to represent a Jewish and Gentile community, not just Jewish in Jerusalem. Also for Mark, the unnamed were held to higher esteem than the named. The purpose appears to usurp the authority of the Twelve Apostles and a growing hierarchy.
For Matthew, Jesus was a Christian Jew usurping Pharisaic Judaism. Matthew appears to be writing from inside Judaism but attempting to supplant it.
For Luke-Acts, it attacked Judaism by promoting the Gentile and was an attempt to sell Christianity to Rome, to usurp any Jewish privilege. It appears this Gospel was already outside Judaism.
And then John, it was an attack on Judaism perhaps coming from the outside, perhaps from a Samaritan tradition. And most importantly, it's the only Gospel where Jesus is boss of the cross, he dictates everything that's going to happen and has foresight about it.
The most interesting part of this book was between parts one and two. It was the Interlude. In between the discussion of the parables told by Jesus and the parables about Jesus, Crossan discusses seven different authors/historians to old who told of the crossing of the Rubicon by Julius Caesar. He notes that the first were told as matters of fact, some not even mentioning the river by name. However later authors embellished, created mythological elements like, in the case of Lucan’s telling of the crossing, a “being of wondrous stature and beauty, who sat and played upon a reed…” snatched a trumpet from one of Caesar’s trumpeters and was the first to cross showing the way.
What’s interesting about this is how, unlike the matter of fact historical recounting of Caesar’s invasion of Rome, we have no matter of fact historical accounts of Jesus. All we have is parable. This is one of the indications to me that there never was a historical Jesus just as there never was a “being of wondrous stature and beauty” who led Caesar and his army across the Rubicon. But Crossan ends this book by giving reasons he still thinks there was a historical figure behind the parable. I won't dissect that here, it isn't entirely relevant. For what we'd at least both agree on, is that if there ever was a historical Jesus, that person is lost to history.
December 30, 2022
Crossan does an excellent job of defining what parables are and developing his own taxonomy of Riddle, Example, Challenge, and Attack parables, which he uses to classify many of the famous parables of the New Testament and discuss the evolution of Christian thought in the four Gospels. It is a fast and easy read, written in an engaging and accessible style.
Crossan is clearly very knowledgeable about the history of the Gospels and the Christian tradition, and this book is full of fascinating asides that I would have enjoyed seeing him elaborate on. His style is also a little discursive, more like a survey of the author's thoughts on the parabolic nature of the New Testament rather than having a strong overall thesis about what it all means.
I felt like the book failed to live up to its subtitle, "How fiction by Jesus became fiction about Jesus", because it doesn't delve enough into the historical context and the process of how Christianity began and evolved. The most profound question of all, whether Jesus himself was a factual or fictional character, is discussed only briefly in the epilogue and not given the treatment it deserves in light of the thoroughly parabolic nature of the texts.
I would recommend this book to someone already pretty well versed in the study of the Gospels and their historical context, who can benefit from Crossan's development of a typology for parables. I'd be reluctant to recommend it as an introductory text about the Gospels and their development, which is what I think the tagline implicitly promises. I was left wanting more, and will likely explore some of Crossan's other books to see if I can find it.
Crossan is clearly very knowledgeable about the history of the Gospels and the Christian tradition, and this book is full of fascinating asides that I would have enjoyed seeing him elaborate on. His style is also a little discursive, more like a survey of the author's thoughts on the parabolic nature of the New Testament rather than having a strong overall thesis about what it all means.
I felt like the book failed to live up to its subtitle, "How fiction by Jesus became fiction about Jesus", because it doesn't delve enough into the historical context and the process of how Christianity began and evolved. The most profound question of all, whether Jesus himself was a factual or fictional character, is discussed only briefly in the epilogue and not given the treatment it deserves in light of the thoroughly parabolic nature of the texts.
I would recommend this book to someone already pretty well versed in the study of the Gospels and their historical context, who can benefit from Crossan's development of a typology for parables. I'd be reluctant to recommend it as an introductory text about the Gospels and their development, which is what I think the tagline implicitly promises. I was left wanting more, and will likely explore some of Crossan's other books to see if I can find it.
January 13, 2018
Stories about Jesus are parables similar to the stories Jesus told. He was teaching his followers how to tell his story, but they were often poor students. Crossan compares differences among the often-retold parables. Of the four kinds of parable in and before the time of Jesus (riddle parable, example parable, challenge parable, attack parable), his were challenge parables, told to shake up your assumptions and keep your understanding of the Bible from slipping into familiar partialities and self-serving ruts. Much of the Bible is better understood as parable than as history. Entire books of the Bible are parables: Ruth, Job, Esther. Sadly, and blame me not Crossan if this is wrong, the gospels slowly slip away from what Jesus said and taught, from Mark to Matthew to Luke-Acts and John, until Revelations stands Jesus on his head with the violence and rage with which it sorts good from evil. Along the way we lose "judge not," and "Love like the sun and the rain, that come to the deserving and the undeserving alike," and all that was best in his teaching. One of the three best books I've read about Jesus and his teachings.
June 2, 2025
Will you like this book? That depends whether you like authors asking rhetorical questions and then painstakingly answering them. What if you don’t mind rhetorical questions? In that case, you still need to deal with an author who 1) creates annoying lists of his points, 2) needlessly repeats himself, and 3) needlessly repeats himself. He also begins and ends each chapter with a summary of what he is saying, as though this were a middle school textbook. Put another way, this book reads as though it were a high school term paper stretched to meet the teacher’s page requirements. I seriously wonder whether this book is just a poorly edited transcript of lectures Crossan gave in an introductory college course, where he needed to provide a painstaking “road map” for inexperienced students.
This is particularly disappointing because I have found several of Crossan’s other books to be insightful, interesting, and well written.
In summary – since everything in this book is perpetually summarized – this is far from Crossan’s best work.
This is particularly disappointing because I have found several of Crossan’s other books to be insightful, interesting, and well written.
In summary – since everything in this book is perpetually summarized – this is far from Crossan’s best work.
November 8, 2017
John Dominic Crossen is a scholar of high esteem. This book has changed my views on the entire Bible. Fr. Crossen lays out a clear and simple understanding as to how almost all of the bible is a parable of one kind or another. His adaptation of the Gospels (he includes Acts and the continuation of Luke, not a separate book, but a second volume of the same book) into parables about Jesus was eye-opening. I especially like the chapter about Matthew and he shows that Jesus first, in chapter 5 of the Gospel (the beatitudes) strongly condemns anyone who even calls someone a "fool". Yet in chapter 28 of the same Gospel, we hear Jesus calling people (mostly the Pharisees) hypocrites! Crossen asks the question does that make Jesus a hypocrite, or is it just Matthew putting words in his mouth? To me, it just further strengthens my belief that Jesus was just an ordinary man, and not divine in any sense.
January 4, 2024
The Gospels tell us that Jesus taught in parables. What if the gospel writers did likewise? Crossan makes a good case that they did. In particular, he traces the changes made from Mark, the earliest gospel, to John, the last gospel, and the influence of the gradual, and then abrupt, separation of the Christian Jews and "god-fearing" Gentiles from the establishment Jews. He identifies the roots of many of the New Testament parables about Jesus in the stories of the heroes and prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures. (Remember "Darmok," the Star Trek Next Generation episode about the alien race who spoke in metaphors? The New Testament is like that.)
Like a good homilist, at each step Crossan tells us what he's going to show, then he shows us, then he tells us what he showed us. This book is a delight for any of us who have tried, and failed, to reconcile the small and large differences in the Gospels.
Like a good homilist, at each step Crossan tells us what he's going to show, then he shows us, then he tells us what he showed us. This book is a delight for any of us who have tried, and failed, to reconcile the small and large differences in the Gospels.
October 3, 2018
An excellent, marvellous scholarly work for readers who are rather familiar both with the Bible and issues raised concerning its historical and theological context. First I liked this work, then loved it, learned a lot from it, and at the end became somewhat doubtful about the simplicity of labeling the entirety of each Gospel as a challenge, attack, or combined challenge and attack parable. I still like to see them as much more, primarily as traditional, more generic, constructive, heartening euangelia, "good news." I accept the importance of challenge in them, but there is much more. What about those who repeatedly read and hear these texts, e.g. in church liturgies or in lectio divina? Should they remain at the level of appreciating or pondering these challenges? I think not, and the intention of Jesus or the evangelists doesn't seem to stop there, either.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews