Short Stories by Jesus: The Enigmatic Parables of a Controversial Rabbi

by Amy-Jill Levine

The renowned biblical scholar, author of The Misunderstood Jew , and general editor for The Jewish Annotated New Testament interweaves history and spiritual analysis to explore Jesus’ most popular teaching parables, exposing their misinterpretations and making them lively and relevant for modern readers. Jesus was a skilled storyteller and perceptive teacher who used parables from everyday life to effectively convey his message and meaning. Life in first-century Palestine was very different from our world today, and many traditional interpretations of Jesus’ stories ignore this disparity and have often allowed anti-Semitism and misogyny to color their perspectives. In this wise, entertaining, and educational book, Amy-Jill Levine offers a fresh, timely reinterpretation of Jesus’ narratives. In Short Stories by Jesus , she analyzes these “problems with parables,” taking readers back in time to understand how their original Jewish audience understood them. Levine reveals the parables’ connections to first-century economic and agricultural life, social customs and morality, Jewish scriptures and Roman culture. With this revitalized understanding, she interprets these moving stories for the contemporary reader, showing how the parables are not just about Jesus, but are also about us—and when read rightly, still challenge and provoke us two thousand years later.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, Theology, Christianity, Christian, Spirituality, Faith

320 pages, Hardcover

First published April 8, 2014

About the author

Amy-Jill Levine is University Professor of New Testament and Jewish Studies and Mary Jane Werthan Professor of Jewish Studies at Vanderbilt Divinity School and Department of Jewish Studies. Her books include The Misunderstood Jew: The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus; Short Stories by Jesus: The Enigmatic Parables of a Controversial Rabbi; four children's books (with Sandy Sasso); The Gospel of Luke (with Ben Witherington III); and The Jewish Annotated New Testament (co-edited with Marc Z. Brettler). Her most recent books are The Bible With and Without Jesus: How Jews and Christians Read the Same Stories Differently (co-authored with Marc Z. Brettler), Sermon on the Mount: A Beginner's Guide to the Kingdom of Heaven; and The Kingdom of Heaven: 40 Devotionals. In 2019 she became the first Jew to teach New Testament at Rome's Pontifical Biblical Institute. Professor Levine, who has done over 300 programs for churches, clergy groups, and seminaries, has been awarded grants from the Mellon Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the American Council of Learned Societies. Institutions granting her honorary degrees include Christian Theological Seminary and the Episcopal Seminary of the Southwest.

Reviews

[Michael Austin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a frustrating book to read, and a hard book to review, but this is primarily because so much of it is very good, and what (in my view) falls short is inconsistent and hard to describe. But I'm going to try because, well, that is what book reviews do.

First, the really good stuff. The major argument in the book is that the Christian tradition has misunderstood the parables of Jesus Christ by turning them into attacks on the Jews, which requires that they always represent Judaism as legalistic, tradition-bound, exacting, unforgiving, and bound up in a theology of ritual and works. Levine, a Jewish New Testament scholar at Vanderbilt, calls BS.

I think that she is exactly right, and I didn't realize this until I read Short Stories by Jesus. She patiently shows how the traditional interpretations of the parables all focus on reversing an ideology supposedly held by the Second Temple Jews of Christ's time. The story of the Good Samaritan shows how Priests and Levites were afraid of ritual contamination and so passed by the man who had been attacked by robbers; the Prodigal Son contrasts the works-righteousness of the Older Son with the unmerited grace that the Father shows to the Prodigal. And so on. The parables demonstrate how Jews had their chance with the Gospel, but they blew it, so God is now going to give it to the Gentiles (which, Levine points out, is the traditional interpretation of the parable of the Laborers on the Vineyard).

Levine also shows that this is bunk. The Jews of Christ's time had a rich and developed theology of caring for the poor, of atonement and reconciliation, of the unconditional love of God, and most of the other things that Christians find in the parables and pretend to represent Jesus's massive departure from the Pharisees of his day. Pharisees, it turns out, were not all evil hypocrites who followed the law blindly. Lots of them were pretty cool. But they ended up with a bad wrap.

Levine is clear about the difficulty that she faces in trying to resituate the parables in their original Jewish context. This is difficult work because the anti-Semitic interpretations started in the Gospels. Luke, especially, often frames the parables in ways that make the negative portrayals of Jews inevitable. So Levine has to try to parse out the core of the parable and discount the narrative setting in which it occurs, which is an extraordinary difficult sort of textual criticism to do, but I think that she does a creditable job.

Basically, I think that Short Stories by Jesus does an exceptional and near-perfect job of showing that the parables don't really mean most of the things that I have always believed that they meant.

But. . . . .

Overthrowing old interpretations is only part of the game. The exegete still has to show what they do mean. And here I was not as impressed. Levine does not seem to have any kind of consistent approach to positive interpretation. Sometimes she situates them in the context of the average Jewish day laborer of the time--and tries to explain what such a person would have heard. Other times, she invokes an extremely complicated critical apparatus and makes arguments that rely on commentaries and linguistic distinctions that would have bewildered the people of this context or any other. And sometimes, she offers a sort of bland "why can't we all just get along" reading that hovers at the top of the surface and never gets deeper.

In the end, most of her interpretations destabilize so many traditional meanings, and offer so few compelling alternatives, that the parables end up looking like zen koans--contradictory stories that may or may not mean anything at all but which sustain an enormous amount of contemplation. This is a fine thing to be, but I don't really think that this captures the essence of how the New Testament uses parables as a teaching tool. It's not just that I disagree with the way she interprets the texts (I do, but we are supposed to disagree about such things). I don't entirely buy the implicit assumptions about why Jesus would have told these stories to begin with.

So, bottom line: this is a great book for knocking Humpty Dumpty off the wall, but it doesn't quite get him all together again by the end.

[Clif Hostetler · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first century audience listening to Jesus speak parables were Jewish and unaware that a religion distinct from their own would exist in the future based partly on the things that their speaker was saying. Their response to and understanding of the parables at that time was based on their existential cultural, religious, economic, and political circumstances. It was an environment and orientation different from later generations including the authors of the Gospels who were apologists for Christianity.

The purpose of this book is to utilize the tools of critical analysis and history combined with some imagination and “playful speculation” to recreate what must have been going on in the minds of those original listeners. The author, Amy-Jill Levine, is a both Jewish and a scholar of New Testament studies, a combination that makes her uniquely qualified and motivated to write this book.

Though Levine's goal is to offer her conclusions regarding first century thinking, most of the book's narrative is spent evaluating translations, meanings, and interpretations offered by others. The book proceeds to critique these prior commentaries. There's plenty of historical background included—(e.g. who were the Pharisees and who were the Samaritans). Then, generally toward the end of the respective chapters, the book's narrative finally offers the author's preferred take or understanding of the parable.

One embarrassing reality is that most parables have been interpreted at least once in history—usually more than once—in ways that could be classified as "screeds against Jewish practice, ethics, or theology." Many commentaries make the parables into allegories that demonstrate the superiority of Christian theology over that of Jewish legalism. These are certainly not thoughts that the original listeners would have had.

Levine maintains that the stories are parables, not allegories. Thus no secret key is required for understanding.

What if the parable is from Jesus, but is not autobiographical? What if the virgins are virgins, the bridegroom a delayed suitor, and the oil just oil and not "good deeds" or "sufficient faith"? With this non allegorical reading, the right questions can be answered. When is selfishness appropriate and when not? Do we rejoice at the suitor's coming or condemn him from showing up late? Do we want to go into the banquet with a delayed suitor who slams the door in the face of our friends (after all, it is a good party), or do we stay outside with the women just returned from the 7-Eleven with more oil? Might there be a third way, so that all can rejoice? (p.280)

In other words the parables are prompts to ask questions, be slightly puzzled, and a bit disturbed.

I'm under the impression that this book is written for a popular audience (i.e. not academic). However, it requires a reader who's truly interested enough in Bible study to stick with it. It had about as much exegesis as I could tolerate.

[Judy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am calling this "read" even though I must confess I didn't read every word. I have been a part of most of the classes at church where we studied the book. It's interesting, I think, to consider what a New Testament scholar from a Jewish background can teach us about the parables attributed to Jesus. Levine describes herself as a: "Yankee Jewish feminist who teaches in a predominantly Christian Divinity school in the buckle of the Bible belt." Because of her heritage, she points out the likely view of those to whom Jesus gave his ministry. I felt, at times, she was a bit defensive about the negative view that is often given to Jewish stereotypes, but then, I haven't walked in her shoes, nor do I have her depth of knowledge in either Jewish history nor the Bible. This isn't a book one breezes through, but one I recommend to anyone wanting a different perspective. Here are several quotes from the last chapter which says it much better:

Parables can unlock the mysteries we face by helping us ask the right questions: how to live in community; how to determine what ultimately matters; how to live the life that God wants us to live.

The parables, if we take them seriously not as answers but as invitations, can continue to inform our lives even as our lives continue to open up the parables to new readings. Page 297

[Lee Harmon · Rating 5 out of 5]

If this isn’t Levine’s best, it’s close. She writes from a practical, scholarly Jewish perspective, highlighting the world Jesus lived in. In this book she tackles the more controversial parables Jesus spoke, making an effort to put these stories back in their first-century Jewish setting.

Levine appreciates the depth of Jesus’s parables, and she digs deep in her analysis, but still seems content with an ambiguous meaning. She seldom insists on a single interpretation, yet often discards traditional Christian interpretations when they conflict with what she knows about first-century Palestine. In other words, she often finds the strongest meaning in the most straight-forward rendition, and that’s usually the most edgy interpretation, which fits well with what we know of Jesus-the-storyteller.

The lost sheep is a repentant sinner? Naw, Luke got that wrong. The lost sheep is just a lost sheep, a financial setback like the parable of the lost coin. We should try to identify with the obsessive shepherd, not the wandering sheep. Jesus’s meaning may not be crystal clear, but if you’re not looking at the parable from a down-to-earth perspective instead of the Christian meaning that developed later, you’ll surely miss his point.

I really loved this book. Here are the nine parables Levine illuminates:



Lost Sheep, Lost Coin, Lost Son

The Good Samaritan

The Kingdom of Heaven Is like Yeast

The Pearl of Great Price

The Mustard Seed

The Pharisee and the Tax Collector

The Laborers in the Vineyard

The Widow and the Judge

The Rich Man and Lazarus



Harper One, © 2014, 313 pages

ISBN: 978-0-06-156101-6

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

Appropriately enough, Amy-Jill Levine's look at 11 of Jesus' parables – which she argues were intended to be provocative and challenging – is itself provocative and challenging. With only a couple of exceptions, she dismantles what might be considered the mainstream or popular interpretation of each parable, as well as showing how liberals and conservatives alike have domesticated the parables to better fit inside their respective ideological comfort zones.

The book is most useful in correcting two millennia of anti-Jewish errors and stereotypes; Levine shows time and again how Pharisees, purity laws, the Temple and Torah were misconstrued, if not outright abused, in establishing Judaism as a foil for Jesus' teachings, when in fact the parables largely reinforced, rather than subverted, prevalent Jewish notions of the first century.

Short Stories by Jesus should be required reading for anyone studying the parables, Jesus' life or the New Testament. As usual, Levine's perspective as a Jewish scholar of the New Testament opens up the teachings of Jesus in a way many Christians simply don't have the tools to do, while she also has the quick wit, incisive analysis and cultural background to effectively rebut centuries of poor Christian understanding of the Jewish culture in which the faith was born. On top of that, she's an excellent writer who can distill scholarship into the common language without speaking over the heads of or down to her audience. Well worth the read!

[David · Rating 1 out of 5]

To be liberal, 1.5 stars. Quite pleased to be DONE with this.

The author is Jewish and teaches NEW TESTAMENT at Vanderbilt -- let's just say she doesn't value Jesus and the parables as much as a Christian. And she REALLY dislikes Luke. But to be totally fair, she says she thinks Jesus has something to offer Jews . . . just not salvation.

All of THAT aside, the book is just tedious. Clearly written to pad her academic credentials. Too much blah blah blah. When she wants to be interesting, even humorous, she can be. Mostly she just wants to be EXHAUSTIVE. Sorry, but reading about what every rabbi has had to say about the parables is NOT interesting.

Lesson learned: Read the very last section of the book first, then read the very last section of every chapter. That's enough. And have your own copy of the Bible (or several translations even) to get other perspectives . . . often the scriptures quoted are her OWN translation, and they are STRANGE.

I'm giving my copy away. Will never look at it again.

December 2018: I did not lie — I DID give my copy away, but my wife kept hers and I AM going to look at it while studying parables with another book. So if my opinion of this changes I’ll let you know.

Following up: my opinion didn't change. Yawn.

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book for seminary. In this book Amy-Jill Levine examines several parables told by Jesus and seeks to provide "de-domesticated" interpretations that bring out the original "provocative" nature of the parables, both to people today and to the people who heard Jesus tell them. Though she is not a Christian, Levine nevertheless believes that the parables are stories of "genius" and contain lasting wisdom, and in this book she reads the parables in ways that are surprising and thought-provoking.

Levine argues that the parables have been "domesticated". Especially in the Christian church, we have heard the same traditional interpretations over and over again such that we are no longer challenged or surprised by them. Worse, we often read anachronistic meanings of later theological development (the emphasis on faith vs works righteousness, for example) into the parables, and have a tendency to always paint Jewish characters as bad and gentile/those perceived to be "outsiders" as good. Levine takes a lot of time to quote many many interpreters who fall into these errors and to refute them- probably 70% of each chapter is dedicated to arguing against different commentators.

I do think this corrective is good. We should not be reading grace and works into every parable, and Christians do often forget that Jesus was Jewish. Levine also pushes back HARD against allegorical interpretation. This push back is helpful because interpreters often over-allegorize and read too much into the text that is not there. Parables are short, and their length serves their purpose to make a point without getting bogged down in all the details.

So the corrective is in general good. That said, the fact that so much of the book is dedicated to arguing against other interpretations becomes repetitive and tiring, especially when the interpretations being argued against seem to follow basically the same sorts of patterns every single chapter. The point needs to be made, but that didn't make it more fun to read.

This is not helped by the fact that, in my opinion, Levine's own interpretations are not always convincing. I do think that her interpretations are definitely interesting (my favorites are her thoughts on the Pharisee and the Tax Collector, and the connection between the Yeast parable and the divine visit to Abraham). But often she doesn't come to any clear interpretation, and instead offers a variety of thoughts and lines of interpretation. Frustratingly, she also doesn't clearly say which of these lines she is proposing as something the original hearers would have heard, and which are more imaginative, though some are clearly imaginative. (For example, in her interpretations of the parable of the Pearl she tells a story about a woman she met who gave up everything- including her marriage- to pursue her dreams and "redefine" herself. This almost certainly would not be an accepted reading by anyone who heard this parable originally).

Sometimes Levine seems to imply that Jesus' parables are provocative precisely because they are inscrutable and have no clear message. She herself says that we should see the parables "not as 'meaning' but soliciting our meaning making." (P298). Though there is merit in being open to hearing other meanings than what we're used to, it is difficult to me to imagine that people would have paid attention to Jesus if he was a teacher who went around telling stories nobody understood and refused to explain to them for fear of "constraining the meaning". It also feels a bit unsatisfying that, after calling out tons of commentators for producing what she evaluates as ahistorical readings, she doesn't always even offer a historical reading herself.

Levine's other major opponent in this book is the writer of Luke, who has already "domesticated" Jesus' parables by fitting them to his theological agenda through his framing and summaries. In addition, Luke's interpretation involves allegorizing some of the parables which as I mentioned is completely rejected by Levine. So throughout the book Levine operates with a criterion of dissimilarity - the more dissimilar an interpretation is from Luke's intended, the more likely it is to be original to Jesus. Levine argues that when we look at the parables themselves, subtracting Luke's additions, we see that they actually do not fit Luke's meaning as well as we once thought. This argument definitely holds some water, as we see Luke and Matthew both using the same parable (the lost sheep) to make different theological points.

But I questioned whether Levine's pushback was always warranted, especially her extreme push back against any sort of allegorization. She says, "If the interpretation requires an answer key or a decoder ring, then we are not hearing it as those who first heard it did. Jesus told parables, not allegories." (P301) The point is well taken if the decoder ring is something that would not have occurred to the gospel writers. But surely Levine is not saying that allegories did not exist at all back then or that people would not have understood them? All three synoptics have Jesus telling the parable of the sower, and giving an allegorical interpretation (of course one could argue that this is not original to Jesus).

If Levine is arguing that the parables by themselves would not naturally lead to an allegorical interpretation on their own, then she's probably right. But if Jesus ever told parables in response to certain situations as the gospel writers have him doing, then the allegorical interpretation is clear.

As an example, Luke tells the stories of the Lost Sheep, the Lost Coin, and the Prodigal Son with the context that the Pharisees and teachers of the law weren't happy that Jesus was eating with those considered sinners. In this context the parables are about rejoicing with the sinner who repents and not scorning them. Levine rejects this allegorical reading because, among other reasons, in the parable of the Sheep and the Coin it is the shepherd and the woman respectively (who represent God) who have lost the sheep. She claims that to allegorize the way Luke does is to paint God as negligent. So Levine claims that the original hearers wouldn't have heard it this way because the allegory doesn't work at this and other points.

The problem with this is that the allegory clearly works for the readers of Luke, provided the context, and therefore assumedly it would have worked for the original hearers too. No matter how imperfect the allegory is, if Jesus did indeed tell it in the context of sinners repenting (or of Pharisees grumbling at their repentance), then the meaning is clear.

Levine might argue that this situation never happened- that Jesus didn't actually get into disputes with the Pharisees. Indeed in the book she seems to believe that Jesus didn't criticize the Jewish leaders much at all. There is also no indication in the book of Jesus ever having claimed to be the Messiah. If Jesus did claim to be the Messiah, suddenly we have to reckon with what the parables might be saying about Jesus himself. As I read this book it became clear that Levine's interpretation of the parables (and everyone elses') is highly dependent on the kind of Jesus she sees, which makes sense.

I am definitely going to remember many of the thoughts Levine had about many of the parables- they are indeed provocative. I just don't know if I really feel confident that all of them are what Jesus' original hearers heard.

[Andrew Chandler · Rating 2 out of 5]

While she makes some good points, Levine has an agenda (highlighting anti-Jewish stereotypes and exploring feminist perspectives) that distracted me from her interpretations of the parables and really took over the focus of the book. Her agenda and her frequent potshots at groups she disagrees with (the boy scouts, conservative christians) were perplexing as it wasn't what I expected from a scholar. In the end I felt that I would need to read another book on the same topic to form my opinions, as Levine gave me many reasons to question her conclusions.

[Roy Howard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Conventional interpretations have domesticated the parables of Jesus. Nowadays when the parable of the Good Samaritan is read in worship, eyes glaze and minds wander, anticipating the standard bashing of passersby while lifting up the heroic Samaritan outsider for listeners to emulate. It’s obvious. Heads nod, slightly bored. Similarly, listeners know the “point” of the parable of the Prodigal Son before it’s launched. More troubling than the implicit supersessionism that permeates conventional preaching of the parables (which we will get to later), is how they have been stripped of their provocative nature. Originally the stories of Jesus troubled listeners with their enigmatic endings and puzzling characters; often they compelled self-recognition, anger, and occasionally repentance. Their original capacity to provoke has been replaced with facile caricatures of Jews and banal moral lessons suitable for the Chicken Soup genre. That is the central argument of this book. Amy-Jill Levine, an Orthodox Jew who teaches Jewish Studies and New Testament at Vanderbilt University, is a provocateur with a wry sense of humor. She brilliantly restores the shocking nature of the original stories of Jesus. As in her previous book, The Misunderstood Jew, Levine is most helpful to Christians who have grown complacent with all scriptures and carry unquestioned biases into every reading. A Biblical scholar, her range of historical knowledge is astonishing along with the precision of her exegetical skills. Moreover, and importantly for those who may be most challenged by her argument, her attention to facts rather than conventional opinions evokes confidence in the reader. However much you may be provoked by her interpretations, you cannot deny the evidence she brings to her argument. Here she asks two main questions, “How do we hear the parables through an imagined set of first century Jewish ears, and then how do we translate them so that they can be heard still speaking?” She then proceeds to bring those questions to parable after parable with a relentless intention to discover the original provocation of Jesus. If the interpretation of the parable provokes no internal shift, no disturbance of some kind, it may be a clever bit in a sermon but is unlikely to be the truth that Jesus offered to his original audience. “Most interpretations are obvious and uninteresting.” This is the challenge. “Rather than catch in the throat¬–a matter that really is something of life and death–bland interpretations slide easily down the gullet and pass quickly through the body.” Commenting on the parable of the banquet in Luke 14: “The parable should disturb. If we hear it and are not disturbed, there is something seriously amiss with our moral compass. It would be better if we perhaps started by seeing the parable as not about heaven or hell or final judgment, but about kings, politics, violence and the absence of justice. If we do we may be getting closer to Jesus.” Ironically, getting closer to Jesus is Amy-Jill Levine’s intent for her readers, especially Christian readers shaped by centuries of anti-Judaism bias built into standard interpretations. One can be richly edified by these parables without such bias, because as she confesses, “they are at the heart of my own Judaism.” This is a pearl of great price.

[Øyvind · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author starts with a good point, namely that many of us have heard the parables of Jesus so many times that we take their meaning for granted and no longer let them surprise or challenge us. It is also true that the parables are open to a range of different interpretations (which, I might add, need not be mutually exclusive of each other).

However, I take issue with the way in which the author goes on to address this problem. From the outset, a sharp distinction is made between parable and allegory: 'A parable requires no external key to explain what its elements mean; an allegory does' (p. 7). This distinction allows the author to banish many of the traditional, theological interpretations of Jesus' parables - including those presented in the Gospels themselves. But I argue that this is to go wrong from the outset.

Let me just quote from the New Jerome Bible Commentary (1990), which cautions against 'a too narrow understanding' of Jesus' parables. The Greek word parabole is a translation of the Hebrew masal, which 'embraces various literary forms: proverbs..., riddles..., taunt-songs..., oracles..., metaphors and allegories' (p. 1365). This is also the case in the Gospels, where the parables can be understood as both similes and metaphors: 'As metaphors, the parables of Jesus use concrete and familiar images which touch people in their everyday lives, but which point to a reality (God's reign or kingdom) that transcends definition or literal description' (p. 1366).

Several times, the author asserts that she knows better how Jesus' parables would have been interpreted by a first-century audience than the Gospel authors did - especially Luke, who is continually criticised for 'domesticating' the parables and turning them into allegories (thus 'misleading' us). There are also a number of flippant and uncharitable remarks made about church fathers and other people, which seem out of place in a book like this.

At times, the author seems to take a cynical or suspicious view of traditional interpretations - claiming that they are motivated by anti-Jewish sentiments or a desire to keep the oppressed subservient to their oppressors. She actually makes a good point about Marcionism (the rejection of the Jewish 'Old Testament God' in favour of the Christian 'New Testament God') being a heresy, but neither the Gospel authors nor the church fathers she criticises are guilty of this error.

I could go on and on about how the author interprets specific parables. The section about the parable of the Prodigal Son, which I paid most attention to as I was reading for a paper on that very topic, is marked by suspicion or even antipathy towards both the father and the younger son but sympathy with the older son: 'Once again, the problem child receives more attention, or more love, than the prudent and faithful one' (p. 64). And: 'I neither like nor trust the younger son' (p. 69).

In the end, this book can be useful to make its reader interested in examining different interpretations of Jesus' parables - and for including a fair bit of information about how they have been interpreted throughout history - but I remain unconvinced by its conclusions and somewhat put off by its tone.

[Gordon · Rating 4 out of 5]

A valuable and interesting approach to the parables which helps remove harmful glosses that have built up through bad historical/critical analysis and bad exegesis. This book fits very much into Amy Jill-Levine's modus operandi which is to remind Christians that Jesus was a Jew (at the first of the Jewish rabbinical tradition) and anti-Jewish interpretations of the New Testament which have built up over time are not based on what Jesus originally intended. Some of her interpretations are long, go off on tangents, and are a bit jargonistic for the average reader who is not theologically trained; however, I used this book to teach an adult Sunday School class and it raised good questions and good discussion.

[Christine Allen Carlsson · Rating 1 out of 5]

Author believes she has a better understanding of what Jesus meant than his disciples. Believes Luke "domesticated" the parables and sets herself above what authors of Scripture interpret parables as meaning. Sees anti-Semitism under every interpretation but her own.

[Gijs Limonard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent exegesis of the parables in the New Testament employing quite the close reading and literary analytical angle; a joy to read, will read more from the author. Some excerpts;

“When we seek universal morals from a genre that is designed to surprise, challenge, shake up, or indict and look for a single meaning in a form that opens to multiple interpretations, we are necessarily limiting the parables and, so, ourselves.”

“Rabbinic texts—Jewish texts compiled after Jesus’s time but containing materials that may well date from years before his birth—record numerous parables. The rabbinic parables frequently take the form, “I will tell (emshal) you a parable (mashal). To what can the thing be compared?” Likewise, Jesus frequently introduces parables with the expression, “The kingdom of heaven is like. . . .” To grasp the implications of the comparison—the term “parable” comes from the Greek para, “along side, together with,” as in “parallel” or “paradox,” and balo, “to cast,” “to throw”—we need to understand the nuances of each side of the equation. We immediately realize that, with such comparisons, no single meaning can ever be determined, just as no single metaphor or simile can be restricted.”

“We might be better off thinking less about what they “mean” and more about what they can “do”: remind, provoke, refine, confront, disturb. . . .”

And as an excellent example of close reading and critical analysis, in this particular instance on the meaning of the term ‘neighbor’;

“His question, “Who is my neighbor?” is on the technical level not a bad one. The Hebrew term usually translated “neighbor” (rea’), the term that appears in Leviticus 19.18, has several connotations. In Genesis 11.3, it means “fellow” or “the other guy”; the NRSV renders this verse, which concerns the building of the tower of Babel, “And they said to one another,” rather than, literally, “And said a man to his neighbor.” Exodus 33.11 uses “neighbor” to describe an intimate friendship between God and Moses. Again, the NRSV misses the technical term by translating, “The LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend”; the term translated “friend” is rea’, “neighbor.” Deuteronomy 19.14 (also 27.17) defines rea’ as a person with whom one shares a common border: “You must not move your neighbor’s boundary marker.” Jeremiah 9.4–5 warns against trusting “neighbors” as well as trusting relatives; here the connotation is others in the community. The term rea’ can also mean “lover.” Hosea 3.1 reads, “Go love a woman who has a lover”; the Hebrew says, literally, “Go love a woman, the lover of a neighbor.” Song of Songs 5.16 is, “This is my beloved and this is my friend”; the term translated “friend” is, of course, rea’. The rea’ in Proverbs 3.29 is someone who “lives trustingly beside you” and therefore against whom no harm should be planned. The context of Leviticus 19.18 suggests that the “neighbor” is to be distinguished from the “stranger” (KJV) or the “resident alien” (NRSV).

[Rebekah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I finished this one via audiobook. It’s a great resource and one I would reach for again to continue to gain different readings on the parables. It did feel dense when reading it so I switched to the audio which helped me- but I don’t think that’s a reason to give it any less stars.

[Irene · Rating 4 out of 5]

Levine brings the insights of a Jew and a Scripture scholar to 8 Gospel parables. She seeks to explain how each would have been heard by a 1st century Palestinian Jew. She dismantles Christian allegorizing of these stories showing how they make presumptions inconsistent with Jewish theology or lived experience. This book opened up new ways of engaging with these familiar stories and offered me new insights into the challenges they present.

[June · Rating 4 out of 5]

Favorites:
Lost sheep, lost coin, lost son
The Good Samaritan
The Pearl of a Great Price
The Laborers in the Vineyard
The Rich Man and Lazarus

[Laurie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting book wherein a Jewish Biblical Scholar takes a critical look at traditional interpretations of the parables, breaking them down in terms of Jewish traditions and concepts at the time of their writing. We too often only see these parables (e.g., The Good Samaritan, Prodigal Son, etc.) in children's Sunday School or mentioned with shallow interpretations or ones that do not align with what the hearers of the time would have understood. I appreciated the nuances which brought deeper meaning. However, the book was a difficult to read in that it was written in a scholarly manner which often obscured the points she was making with numerous citations to all the instances throughout the bible of the term she is discussing. Also, more time is spent on tearing down traditional interpretations and not as much time putting forth her suggested meanings.

[Chris Pratt · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a provocative and thought-provoking collection of very literal, “undomesticated” (challenging/disturbing), Jewish, and ostensibly historically accurate interpretations of several of Jesus’ parables. I had never really considered the idea that Jesus’ parables aren’t allegories (i.e., you don’t need a key to assign external meaning to the characters/locations; the value comes from within the story itself), which is generally how they are interpreted. That opens up a whole world of interpretation (although I think Amy goes too far in saying that allegorical interpretations are wrong and not at all what Jesus intended to teach).

I’ve read a few books that aim to provide the correct interpretation of the Bible based on how its original audience would have understood it. I think such a pursuit is interesting and valuable. What I haven’t heard explicitly stated (perhaps because people view it as the current status quo) is that modern interpretations of the Bible can be more relevant and thus more valuable. Just because a first-century Jew wouldn’t have interpreted a parable a certain way does not mean that that interpretation is “wrong” or even less correct or useful. If the Bible truly came from God, the best interpretation of it is that which comes from the same source—an interpretation given under the influence of the Spirit of God.

I’ve also read a few books about Judaism, but this is first real exposure I’ve had to contemporary Jewish views of Christianity. Christianity and Judaism have a lot in common, but the purpose of this book is to highlight the differences (specifically, how modern Christian interpretations of Jesus’ parables are incorrect, domesticated, harmful, and banal). That made this a particularly challenging read. Here are some of those challenges:
- One of the author’s goals seems to be to prove that Jesus didn’t come to cleanse the inner vessel or call Israel to repentance for having perverted His law or to fulfill the law and bring a new kingdom. Her views of an unassailable class of Jewish leaders at the time of Jesus clash directly with my understanding of how the Jewish leaders are portrayed in the New Testament (which is exactly where the antisemitic interpretations of parables come from). She rejects the depicted self-righteousness of the first-century Pharisees and their rejection of the poor, unclean sinners among the Jews. “Sinners are not ‘outcasts’; they are not cast out of synagogues or out of the Jerusalem Temple. To the contrary, they are welcome in such places, since such places encourage repentance.” Her position is understandable (as someone who believes Jesus was a rabbi, not the Savior of the world), and perhaps even commendable, as her goal is to shed light on antisemitism. At first blush though, I think she is misguided - those erroneous first-century Jewish leaders are distinct from their righteous contemporaries, and certainly distinct from Jews today. It’s possible my negative response is due to discomfort caused by my becoming aware of my previously unconscious biases against Jews. It’s surely at least partially due to the fact that the Christian commentators she references are often giving interpretations that are completely foreign to me (for example, the idea that the father of the prodigal son gave a feast in order to prevent the invitees from stoning his son - “As for the idea that the locals were seeking to stone the son, the claim constructs, on the basis of no evidence, a retrograde and wrathful Jewish culture over and against which, again, Jesus stands as inventing grace and compassion;” also, the idea that the victim in The Good Samaritan was looked down on by Jesus’ audience for being a “tradesman” and thus probably unable to observe laws related to food preparation and purity—“we get the impression that the Jewish audience would find the eating of a ham sandwich damning, but would not care about a violent physical attack”). This straw manning (not in the sense of making up weak arguments, but in choosing existing ones) makes the book feel less relevant and interesting to me.
- She rejects out of hand early church leaders (including the writers of the New Testament) as misunderstanding Jesus’ true intentions as a Jewish rabbi. She is in my view too dismissive of them. That’s understandable (coming from the perspective that Christianity is as a whole theologically misguided) but I would hope that wouldn’t be the case, that Levine would use more empathy and tact in her analysis (maybe she feels she doesn’t need to do so based on the antisemitic views that are apparently so prevalent in Christianity).
- (speaking of the Father in the parable of the prodigal and the prudent sons) “Tertullian made the connection: ‘Who is that father to be understood by us? God, surely; no one is so truly a Father, no one so rich in paternal love.’ I do wonder about Tertullian’s own parenting, for surely other dads have been generous to a fault (literally) with their younger children.” She also later speaks of how the dad wasn’t being generous, just doing what was expected of him with regards to his sons.
- “Apparently Jerome didn’t even make it to the end of the parable,” even though she said herself that Jesus’ parables are not completely allegorical and thus the imagery or metaphor can only be taken so far, and conflicting ideas can be derived from them.
- “Luke cannot abide a topsy-turvy world” because of his “domesticated” interpretation of the parable of The Widow and the Judge.
- “We do not need genetic mutation [a reference to a suboptimal interpretation of the parable of the mustard seed] to see the parable as provocative. Neither do we need to import the category of Jewish purity laws. Despite the fact that no parable directly addresses purity…they see Jesus as challenging the purity system. That is, they see him as challenging one of the major concerns of Torah, of Jewish identity, and of the very practices that have kept Jews Jewish over the past two millennia.” She says that as if that proves the point that the parable couldn’t possibly be interpreted in that way, but that’s exactly what Christians believe about the role of Jesus Christ with regard to Israel.

I was also challenged by Levine’s feminist views, which were unexpected and foreign to me. Take this example:
- “Once the widow of the parable [The Widow and the Judge] is de-domesticated, she opens the possibility for a rereading of the other widows. She grants them both agency and individuality. Luke may want to constrain widows, or women in general, to ancillary roles or pathetic characterizations. Real widows, then and today, resist these stereotypes. Taking a widow in a church today that she is helpless, oppressed, or needy may not be good news. It may also not be accurate.” Good stuff. A little abrasive, but maybe that is exactly what’s needed to get someone like me to consider the error of my ways/views.
However, it does seem like reading the scriptures with a feminist lens could come at the cost of some spiritual power (as indeed reading scripture with any ulterior motive might limit its ability to grow within your heart and change you), like this example:
- “In Luke’s account, the widow is helpless and requires Elijah’s aid. Again, Luke has domesticated a woman, for 1 Kings 17 depicts a feisty mother who first matches Elijah in verbal jousting and then demands that the prophet cure her son. In 1 Kings 17.9 God states, ‘I have commanded a widow there to feed you,’ but the widow, apparently, has not heard the command. Elijah has to talk her into providing for him by promising to at he will provide for her. This widow is not one who prays daily and has hope. Instead, she states, facetiously: ‘…I am now gathering a couple of sticks, so that I may go home and prepare it for myself and my son, that we may eat it, and die.’” Levine is so preoccupied with telling a story about feminism that she misses an opportunity to tell a story about faith. Contrast this from Jeffrey Holland: “[In response to Elijah’s request for the widow to bring him bread and water] Then this understated expression of faith–as great, under these circumstances, as any I know in the scriptures. The record says simply, ‘And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah.’ Perhaps uncertain what the cost of her faith would be not only to herself but to her son as well, she first took her small loaf to Elijah, obviously trusting that if there were not enough bread left over, at least she and her son would have died in an act of pure charity.” Tomato, tomahto? Not quite.

One thing that bothered me was that the book was intelligent but inconsistent. She quotes extensively from an apparent library of sources and wields an impressive vocabulary, but is inconsistent in her criticism of Christian interpretations of the Bible (Christian interpretations are depicted as wrong because they wouldn’t have disturbed or challenged the worldview of Christ’s first-century Jewish audience, but others are wrong because they aren’t consistent with the worldview of that audience). Inconsistency (or logical fallibility) is fine if you’re making a rhetorical, rather than a logical argument, and the blending of the two made it harder for me to know what to make of this book.

Through the first half of the book (until I got used to her writing) I frequently found myself lost. Jill cites a plethora of sources (which I loved) but it was often only after a few paragraphs that her point or stance became clear (typically with some witty metaphorical sarcasm, which I rather enjoyed 😂, that revealed her typical distaste for the viewpoints she had quoted). I often went back to reread sections after understanding the point she was trying to make. Better organization (for example, starting sections by briefly summarizing their content) could serve the book well.

Highlights
- “Sunday morning had become in far too many settings the occasion for a pep talk rather than provocation; the service is designed to comfort rather than to challenge…It's much safer, in many congregations, to assure the faithful how our souls are saved through divine grace rather than to suggest that our societies are saved through personal and corporate aid to the poor. It's much more comforting to hear that God is a loving father who welcomes us home no matter how much we stray than it is to hearan exhortation to reconcile with the brother, sister, or fellow congregant with whom we have not spoken in twenty years. This approach is a deformation of the biblical text; it is not listening to Jesus with ears to hear.”
- “Religion has been defined as designed to comfort the afflicted and to afflict the comfortable. We do well to think of the parables of Jesus as doing the afflicting. Therefore, if we hear a parable and think, ‘I really like that’ or, worse, fail to take any challenge, we are not listening well enough…We might be better off thinking less about what they ‘mean’ and more about what they can ‘do’: remind, provoke, refine, confront, disturb.”
- “The lawyer has asked about eternal life—he should rather be worried about those left half dead. So should commentators.” 😂
- In the parable of the good Samaritan, the Samaritan “trusting the innkeeper to care for the wounded man echoes the trust the wounded man had to have had in him. By trusting the innkeeper, he provides confirmatory evidence that we make our neighbors; that trust is essential for life.”
- I found a profound response to a question I’ve been pondering for a long time about the proper Christian view of money. “Just as the merchant sells all he has to purchase the pearl, so Peter and his associates ‘have left everything and followed’ Jesus (Matthew 19:27). Their profit margin is enormous, for in response to this initial investment, they will sit on thrones, serve as judges over all Israel, ‘receive a hundredfold, and... inherit eternal life’ (Matthew 19:29)… Jesus did not tell all his followers to sell what they have and join the ranks of the destitute. Nevertheless, he appears to have found this lifestyle the best way of laying up treasure in heaven. Just as Paul did not mandate that all followers of Jesus be celibate, as he was, he avised that celibacy, including continence in marriage, is the preferable behavior...So also Jesus: divesting is not required, but it is the preferred…The Gospel tradition does not expect everyone to sell all they have, but it does expect some to do this. Jesus appears to have set up a two-tiered system: some of his followers divest all; others keep their own finances, but dedicate them to the concerns of the mission (feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, providing hospitality to the apostle, etc.).”
- (Referring to the parable of the pearl of great price) “The merchant has found what he wanted, although until the moment of the find, he did not realize his true desire. He has reconceptualized both is past values and his future plans; the ‘magnitude of the life change’ is paramount; he is no longer what he was.”

recapitulate, sanguine, prophylactic, ahistorical, xenophobic, hermeneutics, adduce, angora, merino, profligacy, scion, soteriology, pericope, mellifluent, halakhic, nacre, continence, lachrymose, acquisitiveness, paean, burlesque (parody), inchoate, craven, supererogatory, meritorious, supersessionism, ecclesial, soteriological, euergetism, venal, topos, alabastron, fulminate, pace (with due respect to), irascible, mellifluous, pseudepigrapha, epicurean

[Danny · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a tedious grind to get through. The author, a self described ‘agnostic Jewish feminist’ is a professor at the Vanderbilt school of divinity in Tennessee. She says at the outset that her purpose is to offset what she perceives as the anti-Judaic slant promulgated by many of her Evangelical colleagues. At every instance, she quotes Christian commentators and their disparagement leveled at the Jewish culture and customs intact at the time Jesus taught.
The book is her take on many of the parables told by Jesus during his ministry. She says upfront, and reiterates again at the conclusion that she is not a Christian believer, that to her Jesus was a rabbi, just a controversial teacher, but someone that everyone should be familiar with.
She insists that Jesus, if he ever existed as a real person at all, intended for his parables to be disturbing, more than thought-provoking.
For her texts, she goes back to the original Greek translations from the Aramaic. She tears apart and disparages newer translations of the New Testament such as the NRSV and NIV, describing them as sanitizing, overstating and mistranslating the Koine Greek. She dismisses the KJV as archaic.
She despises Luke, criticizing him for “domesticating and allegorizing Jesus’s parables”. She accuses him time and again of taking, at every opportunity the chance to “infantilize and disparage” Jewish customs and traditions and to placate his first century, gentile audience.
She takes to task numerous Christian authors, especially modern Protestant commentators for their “sexist, anachronistic, stereotypical” views, pounded from both conservative and liberal pulpits and sees.
She views much of modern theology as playing to the popular congregation for pacification or monetary gain.
She does analogize in each instance to prior teachings from the Talmud and corollaries from first century rabbinic tradition to shore up support for her rationalistic take and what she believes was Jesus‘s intent. To her the “kingdom of heaven“ that Jesus was pointing disciples and believers to was a more utopian, egalitarian world here on earth, and nothing more.
Early on, I determined that I wanted to really understand her position. I do admire her well thought out, carefully annotated intellectual effort. Even though I disagree with much of her analysis and most of her conclusions, I admire her insistence that we not trivialize the parables of Jesus or draw superficial conclusions as to their meanings and Jesus‘s intent. I do believe that they all bear a deeper, ‘faith and prayer filled’ study.
My copy is now as heavily marked up as anything I have ever reviewed. This was a good study time for me, even though it was somewhat unpleasant. I am glad I am done and can get back to some lighter more recreational reading.

[James Klagge · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the sort of book I love, and for a while I was planning to give it 5 stars. Then it dropped to 3 stars.
I love the idea of the book b/c of the background it offers to the parables. The author is a Jewish scholar, and reads the parables in light of Jesus' Jewish background and context. She uses the Hebrew Testament and lots of Jewish literature from the time to suggest what resonances words and story lines would have for Jesus and his listeners. And she emphasizes that much Christian interpretation of the parables has been a form of Judaism-bashing, and she reminds us that the gospel writers have often presented the parables in ways that use them for distinctly Christian purposes, and that Jesus and his listeners would not have understood or resonated with that. So far so good. There was a lot of interesting material.
But there was a lot of repetition. I think individual chapters were often originally written or presented to be self-contained, so things get said over and over. This should have been caught at least by an editor, and fixed.
I also realized that a lot of what the book provided was simply negative--shooting down interpretations as anti-Jewish or overly Christian. But there really was no positive take as to what Jesus was up to. After ruling out allegories and numerous over-simplifications, we come back to the stories. They are provocative, but they didn't end up amounting to something interesting. So now I was down to 3 stars.
Basically, the book is a good resource--as long as you know what to expect.
My favorite book(s) about the parables is by Robert Farrar Capon: what were originally 3 books have been combined into: Kingdom, Grace, Judgment: Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus. Oddly, his work is never cited in her extensive endnotes. Perhaps she sees him as her main enemy--presenting Jesus' radical grace as a huge departure from his Jewish background. Perhaps that is a kind of Jewish-bashing. But I guess I took Jesus to be mainly opposed to certain Jewish leaders, not Judaism itself. Maybe I just don't understand the theo-politics of the time. But Capon's work makes we want to go back and read the parables; Levine's does not. And that's a big difference.

[Brandon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Levine problematizes facile interpretations of the parables: Good. She points out latent or outright anti-Semitism in those interpretations: Even better. But what are we left with after she has decimated 2000 years of exegesis? Writings in the sand.

Though, perhaps this is as it should be, I don't know. Perhaps the parables were never meant to be written down and dissected. Perhaps we the readers too often kill the spirit in order to affix the letter, once and for all. Like the pharisees (anti-Semitism?) we are all too eager to stone the adulterous story, which refuses to abide by one meaning, and which instead prefers to shift and change according to perspective. Or, if you like, we can suppose with Nietzsche that truth is a woman (misogyny!), and we dogmatists, having failed to win her with our wooing, have no scruples about pummeling her into submission. Levine, in any case, gives us no choice but to drop our rocks and go home.

"The wind bloweth where it listeth," and so does the spirit. It cannot be possessed or contained, and certainly not in the fragile vessel of language. Turning to the East for some insight into this might help. The Buddha said: "The teaching is merely a vehicle to describe the truth. Don’t mistake it for the truth itself. A finger pointing at the moon is not the moon." Likewise, Jesus says in the zen-like Gospel of Thomas:

"The father’s kingdom is like a woman who was carrying a jar full of meal. While she was
walking along a distant road, the handle of the jar broke and the meal spilled behind her along
the road. She did not know it. She noticed no problem. When she reached her house she put the
jar down and found it empty."

After reading Levine I arrive home and find that my jar is empty. Everything I thought I knew has leaked out. An uncomfortable feeling, but then again, the spirit can only fill that which is empty. And maybe this is what the parables can do for us. Like zen koans, they can short-circuit the analytical mind, making possible new pathways to knowing.

I doubt Levine would go this far; these are my own ruminations. Levine's is the kind of imperfect work--like a parable--that makes the reader fall back on his or her own resources. Which feels unsatisfying for the reader, but may be more beneficial for the spiritual seeker. 3.5 stars

[James Davisson · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very insightful book, engaged in stripping Jesus' parables of the many layers of interpretation they've accrued over the years and looking at them fresh. It's thrilling and sometimes scary to see traditional ideas about these stories shown to be ahistorical, misguided, and even antisemitic--and to be left on the other side, wondering what they would have meant for their original audience, and what they mean now. I love especially the simple move of re-titling the stories, which Levine uses to help readers begin to rethink them. For example, "The Prodigal Son" becomes "The Prodigal and the Prudent" (it is about a father with two very different sons, after all--and his own prodigality, and prudence) or "The Lost Son" (which son is lost--the one who returns, or the one who is alienated?). An excellent resource for preachers, lay Christians, and anyone wishing to deepen their thought about Jesus.

[E. · Rating 3 out of 5]

This fall our Wednesday Night Bible Study at church covered the parables of Jesus, particularly in the Gospel of Luke. I ordered this book, which wasn't yet available the last time I had preached on the parables. And it was a helpful contribution to our study.

Levine is best at deconstructing bad interpretations, particularly the anti-Semitism and supersessionism that can seep into Christian interpretations of these stories.

But I wasn't always persuaded by her own interpretations of the parables.

The book was a good one to read alongside Brandon Scott's work that has been the standard in liberal interpretations of the parables in recent decades.

[Jennifer Barten · Rating 1 out of 5]

If you were wanting to know what a lot of different people thought a parable meant, this would be a great resource. We used it as a Women's Bible Study book though and it was very boring for that. I also felt like Levine spent too much time on what other people thought, never telling her opinions. More than once I wanted to yell "what is your point?!"

[Paul · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not her best.

Amy-Jill Levine's books are usually argued very cleanly, straight forward. This reasoning in this, however, is opaque and forced. Still provides some good insights and the characteristic humor (that wears pretty thin).

[Parker Bjur]

The parables, if we take them seriously not as answers but as invitations, can continue to inform our lives, even as our lives continue to open up the parables to new readings.

Having been raised in a Christian context, parables were often taught to me as one-dimensional allegories about the Kingdom, believers, God, or the Church. This didn’t leave a bad taste in my mouth at the time, but it was boring. Many of the parables were flattened into a single message. In this book, Levine does a great service by pulling these stories out of the mold they've been unduly forced into. This opens up readings that force us to engage with open questions—questions not yet answered two thousand years later—about how we should live, treat others, and prioritize. These questions are not broad but rather specific: questions about labor, justice systems, poverty, siblings, and more. The parables help provoke, instruct, convict, and comfort us on these tangible issues.

If the interpretation of a story told by a Jew to other Jews is based on or yields a negative stereotype of Judaism then the interpretation has gotten more lost than the sheep, coin, or sons, and should not be recovered.

It's impossible to overstate the impact the Christian church has had on anti-Semitism, something I was completely unaware of as a child. One of Levine's great goals is to reconcile interfaith relations and help Christians find meaning in their faith without denigrating Judaism. It is shocking how many interpretations of parables (and many other parts of the Bible) amounted to "Judaism bad, Christianity good." I despair at the thought of so many in pews hearing this same message, and I am grateful for this book, which helps broaden my understanding of Judaism outside of a supersessionist Christian perspective.

Those who pray, "Your kingdom come[, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven]," might want to take some responsibility in the process and so work in partnership with God.

Many parables start with, "The kingdom of heaven is like...," and believers often read this while longing for the time they'll reside in heaven and experience whatever that "dot dot dot" is. They miss the significance of "on earth as it is in heaven." It is all of our responsibility to build the world around us. Jesus offers a model of justice, kindness, love, and mercy that reflects his vision of an ideal world. For followers of Jesus, this offers a blueprint for living out the Lord's Prayer. For non-followers, it may do just the same.

In this book, Levine offers a perspective I had yet to encounter. She is a practicing Jew and a New Testament scholar who provides a framework for removing anti-Jewish interpretations and replacing them with layers of meaning that can inform our lives. This book does assume a reader familiar with traditional Christian interpretations; one unfamiliar may feel lost at many points. However, it does not assume belief or religiosity. Christians can come to this book ready to have their assumptions challenged, while apostates may find new life breathed into texts once thought dead.

[Greg · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a delightful and informative book!

The author is a noted Jewish biblical scholar and possesses a wonderful, if occasionally very droll, sense of humor, using while wading into such "hot-spot" discussions as involved in this book examining several of Jesus' most well-known parables.

She brings her extensive knowledge of her own scriptures -- the Hebrew Bible which, of course, were the same scriptures Jesus knew so well and so often quoted from or alluded to -- as well as a genuine love for Jesus' wisdom and compassion.

Needless to say, I found much of what she wrote in this book eye-opening. One of the points she makes several times is that any of us who find the parables "obvious" are most likely to be missing some key points.

o Are we sure, for example, that the somewhat misnamed "Prodigal Son" parable is principally about the younger son or, indeed, if he was even the central character is Jesus' story?
o Are we certain that the "good guy" in the parable of the judge of questionable honor and the widow is actually the widow? Her discussion of this story was especially revealing to me as she says that what the widow was asking the judge for was not "do me justice" but, in Greek, "avenge me"!

I found the same kind of fascinating "flips" of assumptions in each of the parables to be enjoyable and challenging at the same time.

This quote from the last paragraph of her book gives great insight into why she finds Jesus' "stories" so fascinating:

"One does not need to worship Jesus as Lord or Savior for the parables to have meaning. The people who first heard him did not, at first, worship him. Yet they paid attention, because for those with ears to hear and some patience to ponder, the parables spoke to their hearts. I do not worship Jesus as Lord and Savior, but I continue to return to these stories, because they are at the heart of my own Judaism. They challenge, they provoke, they convict, and at the same time they amuse. At each reading, when I think I've got all the details explained, something remains left over, and I have to start again. The parables have provided me countless hours of inspiration, and conversation. They are pearls of Jewish wisdom. If we hear them in their original contexts, and if we avoid the anti-Jewish interpretation that frequently deforms them, they gleam with a shine that cannot be hidden."

Amen!

[David Campton · Rating 4 out of 5]

This look at Jesus' parables through a literary lens is an important corrective to some of the neo-allegorical exegeses offered in the wake of Craig Blomberg's important refutation of the earlier, simplistic "one parable - one point" approach. She warns us to be wary of anachronistic readings that would not have made sense to Jesus' immediate audience, and to banal/obvious readings, because parables are there to make us think, asking questions of us rather than offering easy answers. As a Jewish scholar she is particularly awake to "ugly supersessionism" and crude anti-Semitism, although I think that at times she misses the point that some expositions that unfairly tarnish all Pharisees with legalism have more to do with a recognition of such traits in modern Christianity than historic Judaism. Her repeated rejection of purity/impurity being an exegetical key too readilt and erroneously employed by some commentators is a point well made, however, while her sense of humour is winsome if unexpected in a book on New Testament exegesis. But perhaps that is exactly what Jesus the Jew in his day was doing for his audience with these frequently ridiculous short stories.

[Dr. Jason Frazier · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very engaging discussion on Jesus’s parables, told by a Jewish New Testament scholar. Levine breaks down the various interpretations throughout Church history to arrive as closely as possible to what the original Jewish listeners would have believed. Levine is not a Christian so she does not subscribe to the Christian interpretation of the parables. Her interpretation is more focused on the historical and cultural understanding. Even if you disagree, you should read this to at least see the parables in a different way.

[Tristan Sherwin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Short Stories by Jesus is an excellent resource. Not only does Professor Amy-Jill Levine do an excellent job of exposing how antisemitic and allegorical interpretations have distorted the parables but, as a Jewish theologian, she helps us eavesdrop into how the original Jewish audience may have understood the stories a Jewish Jesus told.

Engaging, provoking and challenging, Stories by Jesus is a must in the toolbox for those exploring the parables.

—Tristan Sherwin, author of Living the Dream? :The Problem with Escapist, Exhibitionist, Empire-Building Christianity