Parable Of The Talants

[canard78]

I am sorry... I do not believe God works that way.

I just do not believe this. I do not think that Jesus spoke in Parables in order to have many different meanings but rather to obscure some things to enemies or the untrained and make other things clear to people initiated.

Well, I don't know. I tried to look through the thread to find out what you were referring to and I couldn't. Otherwise I wouldn't ask. What is your interpretation of it? That's really my question.

Well sort of. I don't think that anything exactly mentioned in the Parable was meant to be all nations -- but I DO think that it pertains to all nations. I think the Apostles were given the commission later one to go to all nations. Although it was not quite at this time, I think that it would come later. And this parable was telling them not to hide the valuable message He gave them but to spread it -- to all the world. And that if they were slothful -- they would have to account to Him -- a "Hard" Master -- who would call them wicked and unprofitable if they failed to work hard to spread the wealth that they had been so generously given.

It seems that they are sort of a set. Not sure if that was original or the editor making it that way.

In the context of this question I'd given my understanding of a part of it on the first page. I'm on my phone so can't link to the post.

I've mentioned the parable and my understanding of it on other parts of the board so I'll try to consolidate it if I get the chance.

As soon as one talks in symbols one also accepts the message carries subjectivity and interpretation. As the perfect communicator I'm sure Jesus knew this and was aware this would happen. The idea that there is one, elusive application and all others are wrong flies in the face of the principle of parables. At least in my experience of studying them.

The temple endowment is one of the gospels great parables. I can take a different lesson and meaning from it on every visit. I enjoy watching in a different frame of mind each time: as a father, a husband, a son, a priesthood leaders, a priesthood follower, a boss, an employee, a citizen of my community. Each time I do this the 90-minute, interactive parable takes on different meaning and applicability. I do the same with parables. I'm not aware of any injunction from the giver of those parables to not do so.

[CASteinman]

The idea that there is one, elusive application and all others are wrong flies in the face of the principle of parables.

I do not agree at all. I think it is exactly in line with the principle of parables. I think you are mixing up the intent of ritual and artistic symbolism with parables. They are not the same.

The temple endowment is one of the gospels great parables.

Its not a parable.

I appreciate your letting me know it was on the first page. Im gonna go look now.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I was just reading the parable of the talents, and I'd like to know if Joseph ever explained what this means?

Then he who had received the one talent came, and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not scattered. And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth; and lo, here is thy talent; take it from me as thou hast from thine other servants, for it is thine. His lord answered and said unto him, O wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not scattered. Having known this, therefore, thou oughtest to have put my money to the exchangers, and at my coming I should have received mine own with usury. (Matt. 25:24-27, JST.)

Is the Lord agreeing with the wicked servants characterization of him?

Yes, not pleased with his stewardship. More displeased he could not bless him more as any father would want for his child.

[canard78]

I do not agree at all. I think it is exactly in line with the principle of parables. I think you are mixing up the intent of ritual and artistic symbolism with parables. They are not the same.

(Re my statement of the endowment is a parable) Its not a parable.

It's certainly not a documentary!

Elder Packer compared the temple experience and endowment to parables:

If you will go to the temple and remember that the teaching is symbolic you will never go in the proper spirit without coming away with your vision extended, feeling a little more exalted, with your knowledge increased as to things that are spiritual. The teaching plan is superb. It is inspired. The Lord Himself, the Master Teacher, in His own teaching to His disciples taught constantly in parables, a verbal way to represent symbolically things that might otherwise be difficult to understand. He talked of the common experiences drawn from the lives of His disciples, and He told of hens and chickens, birds, flowers, foxes, trees, burglars, highwaymen, sunsets, the rich and the poor, the physician, patching clothes, pulling weeds, sweeping the house, feeding pigs, threshing grain, storing into barns, building houses, hiring help, and dozens of other things. He talked of the mustard seed, of the pearl. He wanted to teach His hearers, so He talked of simple things in a symbolic sense. None of these things is mysterious or obscure, and all of them are symbolic.

http://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/36793_eng.pdf?lang=eng

And in the temple prep manual:

the most sacred symbolic teachings on earth are received in the temple. In a symbolic way, the teachings and rituals of the temple take us on an upward journey toward eternal life, ending with a symbolic entrance into the presence of God. The characters depicted, the physical setting, the clothing worn, the signs given, and all the events covered in the temple are symbolic. When they are understood, they will help each person recognize truth and grow spiritually.

...almost every aspect of the temple ceremony is symbolic. This means that each person should prepare to be as spiritually sensitive as possible to the symbolic nature of the temple endowment.

http://www.lds.org/manual/endowed-from-on-high-temple-preparation-seminar-teachers-manual/lesson-5-learning-from-the-lord-through-symbols?lang=eng

Having said all that, perhaps parable is not the ideal word. Especially as for some it is a word that has implications of being fictitious (though I don't think that is mandatory). Allegory or apalogue might be a better word. It's probably too much of a thread derail to go off on this tangent. So I don't mind using more neutral language of 'symbolic narrative.' Either way, the experience of going through the endowment in different 'roles' gives it a different impact and lesson each time. Same can apply to the parables.

I appreciate your letting me know it was on the first page. Im gonna go look now.

Don't be too excited. It's fairly brief (blink and you'll miss it). I'll try to do something more in depth later if I can.

[CASteinman]

I like allegory. But what is the difference? I have to look ghat up. Either way I don't think Allegory or parable are as open to interpretation as ritual symbolism.

And even ritual symbolism can be incorrectly interpreted

[inquiringmind]

So you all think the wicked servant understood God's character?

None of you would agree with this commentary on Matthew 25:26?

Thou knowest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:

not granting that he was such an one, and that his servant knew him to be such, and had given a true character of him; but supposing he was such a person he had wickedly represented him to be; he turns the argument upon him, that therefore he must needs know, that he expected to have had his money improved, and to have received it with an increase; and that upon such a consideration he ought to have been the more diligent and industrious, in using and improving his talent, and not to have indulged sloth, and idleness; and thus he convicts, judges, and condemns him, as a wicked, slothful servant, by his own words.

Edited April 27, 2013 by inquiringmind