Talk:Parable

Citation tags
Ningauble, please see your citation tags on this article. I reproduce the text from page 98 and 99 below of the reference. Please clarify as to who should be credited with the authorship of the quotes that I have introduced or should they be deleted? --Nvvchar (talk) 02:18, 28 March 2014 (UTC)



[Craig] Bloomberg’s interpretations of individual parables are structured around the tenous assumption that “Each parable makes one point per main character (163) -which is which is later restated to assert that the triadic structure of most of Jesus’s narrative parables suggest that they make three (propositional ) points though ome will make one or two (167).
 * In p.98

John Slider builds on the foundation of Bloomberg’s work but approaches the parables in a different way “. Snider believes that Every parable is an analogy (18) and defines parable as a discursive or narrative amalogy in the service of moral or spiritual argument (84)….Snider argues one analogy is almost inevitably multiplied into several, and parable becomes allegory because every allegory is an elaboration of analogy. Therefore, almost all of Jesus’ parables are allegories – where the comparison is elaborated beyond a single proportional analogy.(99)
 * in pp.98-99


 * The two passages above are not the same as the texts that were [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Parable&oldid=1702557 in the article when I tagged them.] Those texts were misattributed to the persons whose views Gowler discusses, which is why I tagged them. Note that in the first passage above you omit the closing quotation mark that delimits Bloomberg's words from Gowler's remarks about them; and the second passage is clearly a discussion of Slider's views, not a quotation of him. I notce that the [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Parable&oldid=1702871 current article] has been substantially rewritten with less material from Gowler's book. Frankly, I don't see the quotability in any of Gowler's observations quoted here. ~ Ningauble (talk) 11:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry that after this initial discussion had started, I stepped in yesterday night, and made some serious adjustments (see here). I must say I share Ningauble's concerns about the quality of the work cited here: Some quotes were not traced back to its initial source, etc. Now I have started looking into it some more and removed another quote, and explained why (see below). -- Mdd (talk) 13:16, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Quote, moved to the talk page (1)

 * Jesus’s parables appeal to oppositions that “reach right into the depths of existence.” Jesus, by compelling this momentous decision through his parable-telling, gives his opponents the possibility of achieving a “new life,” making a change of existence, and understanding themselves “from the depths up.”
 * David B. Gowler. What are They Saying about the Parables? Paulist Press, 2000 In p.14

The original text on p. 14 is:
 * Comment
 * ... The deeper the opposition that exists between the speaker and the listener, the more significant the decision to be made, and Jesus' parables speak to oppositions that "reach right into the depths of existence" (31) Jesus, by compelling this momentous decision through his parable-telling, gives his opponents the possibility of achieving a "new life," making a change of existence, and understanding themselves "from the depths up" (31)...

Obviously Gowler has mixed his text here with direct quotes from the source (31). In Wikiquote such direct sources should be mentioned, but in this particular case, I think you should not even have taken this source here in the first place. Better go back to the original source, and mention it is partly cited in Gowler (2000, p. 14) Citing mixed sources is almost never a good idea. -- Mdd (talk) 13:08, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Quote, moved to the talk page (2)

 * Every parable is an analogy and defines parable as a discursive or narrative amalogy in the service of moral or spiritual argument….one analogy is almost inevitably multiplied into several, and parable becomes allegory because every allegory is an elaboration of analogy. Therefore, almost all of Jesus’ parables are allegories – where the comparison is elaborated beyond a single proportional analogy.
 * John. W. Sider, in pp.98-99

Original source(s) hare are:
 * John Sider builds on the foundation of Blomberg's work but approaches the parables in a different way.53 Sider believes that "every parable is an analogy" (18)54 and defines parable as "a discursive or narrative analogy in the service of moral or spiritual argument" (84)...
 * David B. Gowler. What are They Saying about the Parables? Paulist Press, 2000 p. 98


 * ... Sider further argues that one analogy is almost inevitably multiplied into several, and parable becomes allegory because every allegory is an elaboration of analogy (19). Therefore, almost all of Jesus’ parables are allegories – where the comparison is elaborated beyond a single proportional analogy.
 * David B. Gowler. What are They Saying about the Parables? Paulist Press, 2000 p. 99

Here is another cocktail of text directly cited from John Sider, text attributed to John Sider, and interpretations by Gowler, and an editor selection adding together text from two pages. This is to much for Wikiquote.
 * Comment

You could consider tracing back the one or two quotes to John Sider's original words and context, but since John Sider doesn't seem to be that notable (see here), you could leave it. -- Mdd (talk) 13:34, 28 March 2014 (UTC)