^{page 437 note 1} cf., for example, Downing's, F. G. frank admission in The Church and Jesus (S.C.M. Press, London, 1968), p. 93, n. 2Google Scholar, and Kasemann's, E. criticism in New Testament Questions of Today (E.T., S.C.M. Press, London, 1969), p. 121, n. 16Google Scholar.

^{page 437 note 2} Fuchs, E., ‘Response to the American Discussion’, in Robinson, J. M. and Cobb, J. B. Jr. (eds.), New Frontiers in Theology II: The New Hermeneutic (Harper and Row, New York, 1964), p. 241Google Scholar.

^{page 437 note 3} E. Fuchs, ‘The New Testament and the Hermeneutical Problem’, in J. M. Robinson and J. B. Cobb (eds.), op, cit., p. 141. Cf. also E. Fuchs, Zur Frage nach dem historischen Jesus (J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, 1960), pp. 399–400 (E.T. Studies of the Historical Jesus, S.C.M. Press, London, 1964, p. 186; and Hermeneutik (J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, ⁴ 1970), pp. 11, 111–26, et passim.

^{page 438 note 1} cf., for example, Zur Frage nach dem historischen Jesus, pp. 405–30 (E.T. pp. 191–212), and Fuchs, E., Zum hermeneutischen Problem in der Theologie: Die existentiale Interpretation (J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, 1959), pp. 281–305Google Scholar.

^{page 438 note 2} Zur Frage nach dem historischen Jesus, pp. 410–11. (E.T., pp. 195–6), and Zum hermeneutischen Problem in der Theologie, pp. 14–51. Cf. also Hermeneutik, pp. 92, 97–98, 121, and 219–30.

^{page 438 note 3} Zur Frage nach dem historischen Jesus, pp. 226, 291, 346, and 415 (E.T. pp. 38, 94, 140 and 199).

^{page 438 note 4} ibid., pp. 288 and 291 (E.T. pp. 91 and 93).

^{page 438 note 5} ibid., pp. 224 and 226 (E.T. pp. 36 and 38).

^{page 438 note 6} ibid., p. 347 (E.T. p. 141).

^{page 438 note 7} Funk, R. W., Language, Hermeneutic, and Word of God (Harper and Row, New York, 1966), pp. 26–28Google Scholar. A parallel comment also occurs in Robinson, J. M., ‘The Parables as God Happening’, in Trotter, F. T. (ed.), Jesus and the Historian: Written in Honor of Ernest Cadman Colwell (Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1968), p. 142Google Scholar.

^{page 438 note 8} Austin, J. L., How to Do Things with Words (Oxford, 1962), p. 6.Google Scholar

^{page 438 note 9} ibid., p. 45 (Austin's italics).

^{page 438 note 10} ibid., p. 52.

^{page 439 note 1} cf. R. W. Funk, op. cit., pp. 146–50. Funk asserts, ‘Like Jülicher, Dodd and Jeremias derive a set of ideas from the parables… The ideational point of Jülicher remains ideational’ (p. 149, Funk's italics). On the other hand David Wenham has drawn my attention to passages in Jülicher which partly question Funk's generalization. Jülicher stresses, for example, that Jesus used pictorial imagery not simply for description but to win the mind, and thence to capture the will (‘gewinnen … gefangen … nehmen’). Cf. A. Jülicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu (Mohr, Freiburg, 1899) vol. 1, p. 105. Similarly, in Nathan's verdict (Urteil) ‘thou art the man’, the purpose of the parable is ‘to strike home’. Both words (Urteil and treffen) are used characteristically by Fuchs. Cf. A. Jülicher, loc. cit., p. 103.

^{page 439 note 2} Cf. Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, (Blackwell, Oxford, ² 1958, reprinted 1967), §§23, 24, 79 et passimGoogle Scholar. Four points may be made at this juncture about concrete examples in the Synoptic Gospels. (1) In most cases, truth-claiming assertions also function in other ways (e.g. as verdictives or implied imperatives). Cf. Matt. 18.33, ‘So also my heavenly Father will do …’; Luke 15.7 and 10, ‘There will be more joy in heaven …’; and Luke 14.11 and 18.14b, ‘Every one who exalts himself…’. In crude and provisional terms, we may admit that these are more than propositions, but deny that they are less than propositions. Similarly, to describe assertions about the future as ‘propositions’ is not to deny their additional feature of ‘asymmetry in the grammar of temporal expressions’ (Wittgenstein, L., The Blue and Brown Books (Blackwell, Oxford, ³ 1969), p. 109Google Scholar).

(2) It is impossible to draw up a list of propositions on the basis of grammar. For example, in Luke 11.13, what is grammatically a question functions logically as a statement inviting response: ‘How much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him?’ Wittgenstein cites examples of questions used as statements (e.g. ‘Isn't the weather glorious today?’); of questions used as commands (e.g. ‘Would you like to … ?’); and of statements used as commands (e.g. ‘You will do this’). Cf. Philosophical Investigations, § 21.

(3) From the standpoint of New Testament criticism, the originality of assertions within given settings is not primarily at issue. The issue is whether within their existing settings they conflict with, or support, the hermeneutical function of parables. (Cf. above on Luke 14.11 and 18.14b.)

(4) Broadly it remains characteristic of propositions that they should stand in some kind of logical relationship to other propositions which are true-or-false. But this must not be equated with narrower notions such as we find in Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. (See below. First-century Jews were aware of logical relationships more subtle than that of direct deduction or entailment (see also below).

^{page 440 note 1} ibid., §§ 66 and 67 (pp. 31–32). Discussed further below.

^{page 440 note 2} ibid., §§ 138–242 (pp. 53–88), especially §§ 172–86 (pp. 70–75).

^{page 440 note 3} cf. Fuchs, E., ‘Das hermeneutische Problem’, in Dinkier, E. (ed.), Zeit und Geschichte: Dankesgabe an Rudolf Bultmann zum 80. Geburstag (J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, 1964), especially pp. 357–360Google Scholar; and Hermeneutik, pp. 8, 62–72, 125 and 269.

^{page 440 note 4} cf. Heidegger, M., Unterwegs zur Sprache (Neske, Pfullingen, 1960), pp. 241–268 (cf. also pp. 83–153)Google Scholar; and Gadamer, H.-G., Wahrheit und Methods: Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik (2nd ed.J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, 1965), pp. 361–465Google Scholar.

^{page 440 note 5} H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., p. 360. Cf. also the translator's comments in Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 141n; Heidegger, M., Unterwegs zur Sprache, pp. 159ffGoogle Scholar; and Ebeling, G., The Nature of Faith (E.T. Collins, London, 1961), p. 16.Google Scholar

^{page 440 note 6} cf. Fuchs, E., Zur Frage nach dem historischen Jesus, pp. 295–296 (E.T. pp. 97–98)Google Scholar, and Zum hermeneutischen Problem in der Theologie, pp. 14ff; and H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., pp. 97ff and 415ff.

^{page 441 note 1} E. Fuchs, ‘The New Testament and the Hermeneutical Problem‘, loc. cit., p. 143. Cf. also Hermeneutik, pp. 64ff and 119ff.

^{page 441 note 2} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, pp. 211–212Google Scholar (German pp. 429–30; Fuchs's italics).

^{page 441 note 3} ibid., p. 33 (German p. 220).

^{page 441 note 4} ibid., pp. 34–35 (German p. 222).

^{page 441 note 5} ibid., pp. 36–37 (German pp. 224–5).

^{page 441 note 6} ibid., p. 155 (German p. 363).

^{page 441 note 7} ibid., pp. 20ff and 160–2 (German pp. 153ff and 369–71).

^{page 441 note 8} ibid., pp. 94–95 and 124–30 (German pp. 291–3 and 327–35).

^{page 441 note 9} ibid., pp. 90–94 (German, pp. 287–91).

^{page 442 note 1} ibid., pp. 33ff, and especially pp. 126–30 (German pp. 220ff and 329–35). Cf. Linnemann, E., Parables of Jesus: Introduction and Exposition (E.T. S.P.C.K., London, 1966), pp. 23–33 (here, ‘picture part’ and ‘reality part’)Google Scholar; and especially R. W. Funk, op. cit., 14–18 and 124–222, where the issue is expounded magnificently under roughly parallel categories, derived partly from Owen Barfield.

^{page 442 note 2} E. Fuchs, ibid., p. 129 (German p. 333; Fuchs's italics).

^{page 442 note 3} ibid. It should not be forgotten that the basic contrast between Bild and Sache goes back at least as far as Jülicher. Cf. A. Jülicher, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 70, with E. Fuchs, Hermeneutik, pp. 220ff. On the broader hermeneutical principle cf. Hermeneutik, pp. 5, 12, 63–68, 126ff, and especially p. 91.

^{page 442 note 4} R. W. Funk, op. cit., pp. 133ff.

^{page 442 note 5} H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., pp. 1–39, especially pp. 16ff.

^{page 443 note 1} ibid., p. xxvi (my italics).

^{page 443 note 2} ibid., p. 72, cf. pp. 66–96.

^{page 443 note 3} ibid., p. 104.

^{page 443 note 4} ibid, (my italics). Cf. pp. 98–102. Gadamer draws on the work of Buytendijk and Huizinga, but not directly on Wittgenstein.

^{page 443 note 5} Wittgenstein, L., Zettel (Blackwell, Oxford, 1967),§§ 231–5Google Scholar.

^{page 443 note 6} ibid., § 233.

^{page 444 note 1} ibid.

^{page 444 note 2} ibid. §§ 234–5 (Wittgenstein's italics). Cf. E. Fuchs, Hermeneutik, pp. 92, 109 and 119–26.

^{page 444 note 3} Wittgenstein, L., Tractatus Logico–Philosophicus (E.T. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1961), 5.6 and 5.62 (Wittgenstein's italics)Google Scholar. Cf. also 5.63, 5.641, and 5.6431.

^{page 444 note 4} cf. Pitcher, G., The Philosophy of Wittgenstein (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964), pp. 144–145Google Scholar; Anscombe, G. E. M., An Introduction to Wittgenstein's Tractatus (Hutchinson, London, ³ 1967), pp. 166–173Google Scholar; Smart, N., Philosophers and Religious Truth (S.C.M. Press, London, ² 1969), pp. 163ffGoogle Scholar; and Poteat, W. H. in Phillips, D. Z. (ed.), Religion and Understanding (Blackwell, Oxford, 1967), pp. 199ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 444 note 5} Heidegger, M., Being and Time (E.T. S. C. M. Press, London, 1962), especially §§ 12–27Google Scholar. In particular cf. pp. 93–95.

^{page 444 note 6} cf. E. Fuchs, Hermeneutik, pp. 126ff.

^{page 444 note 7} H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., pp. 286–90. Cf. also pp. 356ff.

^{page 444 note 8} Heidegger, M., An Introduction to Metaphysics (E.T. Yale, 1959; Anchor, ed. 1961), p. 145Google Scholar.

^{page 445 note 1} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 209 (German p. 436; Fuchs's italics)Google Scholar.

^{page 445 note 2} H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., pp. 232, 286 and 288–90. On the importance of this concept cf. W. Pannenberg, ‘Hermeneutics and Universal History’, in R. W. Funk (ed.), Journal for Theolog) and the Church, vol. 4: History and Hermeneutic (J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, and Harper and Row, New York, 1967), especially pp. 137–52.

^{page 445 note 3} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 28 (German p. 164)Google Scholar.

^{page 445 note 4} ibid., p. 63 (German p. 256; Fuchs's italics).

^{page 446 note 1} Wilder, A. N., New Testament Hermeneutics Today', in Klassen, W. and Snyder, G. F. (ed.), Current Issues in New Testament Interpretation (S.C.M. Press, London, 1962), pp. 40–41Google Scholar.

^{page 446 note 2} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 203 (German p. 419).Google Scholar

^{page 446 note 3} ibid., p. 209 (German p. 426).

^{page 446 note 4} Heidegger, M., An Introduction to Metaphysics, p. 145Google Scholar.

^{page 446 note 5} Fuchs, E., ‘The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant’, in Studia Evangelica (ed. by Aland, K., Cross, F. L., et al. ; Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1959), p. 493 (cf. pp. 487–94)Google Scholar. See also Hermeneutik, pp. 67ff; Zum Hermeneutischen Problem in der Theologie, pp. 281ff; and Studies of the Historical Jesus pp. 196 and 202 (German pp. 411 and 418). Also relevant to these considerations is Fuch's, essay ‘Must one believe in Jesus if he wants to believe in God?’ in Funk, R. W. (ed.), Journal for Theology and the Church vol. 1Google Scholar: The Bultmann School of Interpretation: New Directions? (Mohr, Tübingen, and Harper and Row, New York, 1965), pp. 147–168, especially p. 152Google Scholar, on the contrast between ‘attitudes’ (Einstellungen) and ‘conceptions’ (Vorstellung). (Cf., further, J. M. Robinson, ‘Jesus’ Parables as God Happening’, loc. cit., pp. 134–50; and Funk, R. W., Language, Hermeneutic and Word of God, pp. 163–198Google Scholar. On the parable of the Great Supper, Funk comments, ‘Each hearer is drawn into the tale as he wills… As the story unfolds, he must make up his mind whether he can unfold it’, ibid., p. 192.)

^{page 447 note 1} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 198 (German p. 414; Fuchs's italics)Google Scholar. On the notion of sharing Jesus's experience, cf. Fuchs's, essay ‘Bemerkungen zur Gleichnisauslegung’, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, LXXIX (1954), reprinted in Zur Fiage nach dem Historischen Jesus, pp. 136–142Google Scholar.

^{page 448 note 1} cf. M. Heidegger, Being and Time, § 33, pp. 195–203. Cf. also Vom Wesen der Wahrheit (V. Klosterman, Frankfurt-am-Main 1961), pp. 5–12 (reprinted in Wegmarken, V. Klostermann, Frankfurt-am-Main, 1967, pp. 73ff).

^{page 448 note 2} H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit. p. 415.

^{page 448 note 3} Brown, R. L., Wilhelm von Humboldt's Conception of Linguistic Relativity (Mouton, The Hague, 1967), p. 54CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Brown's illuminating study traces the important connexions between Hamann, Herder, and Humboldt, and adds useful comments on the linguistic significance of this whole approach. Cf. especially pp. 24–39 and 54–68.

^{page 448 note 4} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 210 (German p. 428). Cf. M. Heidegger, Unterwegs zur Sprache, pp. 37–82 and 241–68Google Scholar.

^{page 448 note 5} Heidegger, M., An Introduction to Metaphysics, p. 89.Google Scholar

^{page 449 note 1} H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., pp. 383–91. Cf. pp. 384 and 387.

^{page 449 note 2} ibid., p. 388. Cf. also Fuchs's comments in Hermeneutik, pp. 71 and 129f.

^{page 449 note 3} Heidegger, M., An Introduction to Metaphysics, p. 132.Google Scholar

^{page 449 note 4} Heidegger, M., Vom Wesen der Wahrheit, p. 12 (Wegmarken, p. 81)Google Scholar.

^{page 449 note 5} ibid. (Wegmarken, pp. 80–81).

^{page 449 note 6} Heidegger, M., ‘Hölderlin and the Essence of Poetry’, in Existence and Being (Vision Press, London, 1968, ed. by Brock, W.), p. 300Google Scholar.

^{page 449 note 7} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 207 (German pp. 424–5)Google Scholar.

^{page 450 note 1} cf. Wittgenstein, L., Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1961), 4.1212 (‘What can be shown, cannot be said’)Google Scholar. On the concept of a comprehensive logical calculus cf. 2.0201, 4.26, 4.31, 5.101, 5.123 et passim (especially the whole of 5). On ‘what we cannot speak’, cf. 5.6, 5.61, 6.41, 6.42, 6.421 and from 6.432 to 7.

^{page 450 note 2} cf. E. Fuchs, ‘The New Testament and the Hermeneutical Problem’, loc. cit., pp. I32ff.

^{page 450 note 3} cf. H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., pp. 361ff, 415ff, and especially pp. 444–6.

^{page 450 note 4} ibid., pp. 338 and 339.

^{page 450 note 5} ibid., p. 255.

^{page 450 note 6} ibid., p. 444.

^{page 450 note 7} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 29 (German p. 165).Google Scholar

^{page 451 note 1} ibid., pp. 74–82 (German pp. 268ff).

^{page 451 note 2} ibid., p. 202 (German p. 418). Cf. Hermeneutik, pp. 132–3, 151, 182 and 184–5.

^{page 451 note 3} Philosophical Investigations, § 108 (Wittgenstein's italics). In this connexion cf. Peter Winch's illuminating remarks in Winch, P. (ed.), Studies in the Philosophy of Wittgenstein (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1969), pp. 1–19Google Scholar.

^{page 451 note 4} L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, especially §§ 316–94 and II.xi, pp. 216–23. Cf. also Zettel (Blackwell, Oxford, 1967), §§ 88–137.

^{page 451 note 5} Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, § 338Google Scholar.

^{page 451 note 6} ibid., § 339. Cf. also §§ 32 and 257.

^{page 452 note 1} ibid., § 335.

^{page 452 note 2} Waisman, F., The Principles of Linguistic Philosophy (MacMillan, London, 1965), p. 296Google Scholar. Cf. pp. 295–8.

^{page 452 note 3} cf. Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, §§ 38–59 and 375–87Google Scholar.

^{page 452 note 4} ibid., § 265.

^{page 452 note 5} ibid., § 279. Cf. §§ 293–309.

^{page 452 note 6} ibid., § 241, and II.xi, p. 226e.

^{page 452 note 7} ibid., especially §§ 138–242. Cf. Zettel, §§ 155–97.

^{page 453 note 1} Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, § 143 (my italics).Google Scholar

^{page 453 note 2} ibid., § 154.

^{page 453 note 3} ibid., § 149.

^{page 453 note 4} ibid., § 144 (Wittgenstein's italics).

^{page 453 note 5} ibid., § 68 (pp. 32e–33e).

^{page 453 note 6} ibid., § 71.

^{page 453 note 7} ibid., § 70.

^{page 453 note 8} ibid., § 79. Cf. also F. Waismann, op. cit., pp. 69–71, for a similar example and comments.

^{page 453 note 9} Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, especially §§ 113–17Google Scholar.

^{page 454 note 1} ibid., § 92 (Wittgenstein's italics). Cf. also §§ 91–117 and 134–6.

^{page 454 note 2} Wittgenstein, L., The Blue and Brown Books (Blackwell, Oxford, ² 1969), p. 17Google Scholar.

^{page 454 note 3} Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, §§ 11, 12, 23–27, et passim.Google Scholar

^{page 454 note 4} Wittgenstein, L., The Blue and Brown Books, p. 17Google Scholar. On the whole question cf. Pitcher, G., The Philosophy of Wittgenstein (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964), pp. 197–227Google Scholar.

^{page 454 note 5} Pannenberg, W., ‘Hermeneutics and Universal History’, loc. cit., p. 144Google Scholar.

^{page 455 note 1} Jülicher, A., Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, vol. 1 (J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Freiburg, Leipzig and Tübingen, ² 1899), p. 105Google Scholar, ‘Das ist ihr Ziel, nicht .

^{page 455 note 2} Dodd, C. H., The Parables of the Kingdom (Nisbet, London, 1936), pp. 24–26Google Scholar.

^{page 455 note 3} ibid., p. 16.

^{page 455 note 4} Jeremias, J., The Parables of Jesus (E.T. S.C.M. Press, London² 1963), especially pp. 105–114Google Scholar. Cf. also Bultmann, R., The History of the Synoptic Tradition (E.T. Blackwell, Oxford, 1963), pp. 179ffGoogle Scholar. Bultmann distinguishes carefully between the point of a parable and its application (p. 182).

^{page 455 note 5} C. H. Dodd, op. cit., p. 25.

^{page 455 note 6} In addition to the discussion above, cf. E. Fuchs, Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 212 (German p. 430); Zum Hermeneutischen Problem in der Theologie, pp. 281ff; and Hermeneutik, pp. 182ff and 219ff.

^{page 455 note 7} The koan is a question which defies answer at a logical, rational, or conceptual level, but which is intended to open one's understanding to the deeper truth of Zen. It ‘unexpectedly opens up a hitherto unknown region of the mind’. Cf. Suzuki, D. T., ‘The Koan’, in Ross, N. W. (ed.), The World of Zen (Collins, London, 1962), p. 53Google Scholar. It is highly significant that Martin Heidegger is said to have remarked about one of Suzuki's books, ‘This is what I have been trying to say in all my writings’ (ibid., p. 344, cited by William Barrett).

^{page 456 note 1} S. Goebel, Die Parabeln Jesu (Gotha 1879). Cf. (E.T.) The Parables of Jesus (Clark, Edinburgh, 1900), especially pp. 24–26.

^{page 456 note 2} The clearest discussion in almost any writer occurs in F. Waismann, op. cit., pp. 164–90.

^{page 456 note 3} Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, § 69Google Scholar. On Wittgenstein's more complex uses of the term ‘language-game’ see Rhees, R., ‘Wittgenstein's Builders’, in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, LX (1959–1960)Google Scholar.

^{page 456 note 4} ibid., §§ 66–67.

^{page 456 note 5} F. Waismann, op. cit., p. 182. Cf. pp. 176–87.

^{page 457 note 1} ibid., p. 183.

^{page 457 note 2} ibid., p. 180.

^{page 457 note 3} cf. Dodd, C. H., Gospel and Law (Cambridge University Press, 1951), pp. 64–83Google Scholar; and Manson, W., Jesus and the Christian (Clarke, London, 1967), pp. 50–57Google Scholar.

^{page 457 note 4} Wittgenstein, L., Zettel § 103.Google Scholar

^{page 457 note 5} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 73Google Scholar. Cf. pp. 73–83.

^{page 457 note 6} Price, H. H., Belief (Allen and Unwin, London, 1969), p. 294Google Scholar.

^{page 458 note 1} ibid., p. 20.

^{page 458 note 2} Funk, R. W., Language, Hermeneutic, and the Word of God, p. 214Google Scholar.

^{page 458 note 3} ibid. (On the other hand, cf. J. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 205. Questions about the settings of parables place some degree of limitation on this approach.)

^{page 458 note 4} E. Linnemann, op. cit., p. 52.

^{page 458 note 5} ibid., p. 55. Cf. E. Fuchs, Hermeneutik, pp. 5, 64, 113–14, and 182–91.

^{page 458 note 6} J. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 108. Cf. also pp. 45–48 and 181–2. On the indispensable character, from a logical point of view, of parabolic interpretations, see Torrance, T. F., Theological Science (Oxford University Press, 1969), pp. 273–277Google Scholar.

^{page 458 note 7} J. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 48.

^{page 459 note 1} ibid., p. 46.

^{page 459 note 2} Knox, W. L., The Sources of the Synoptic Gospels vol. 2 (Cambridge University Press, 1957), p. 93Google Scholar. Cf. also A. Jülicher, op. cit., vol. 2 (1899), pp. 495–514.

^{page 459 note 3} cf. Dodd, C. H., The Parables of the Kingdom, p. 30Google Scholar.

^{page 459 note 4} R. Bultmann, op. cit., pp. 199–200.

^{page 459 note 5} Oesterley, W. O. E., The Gospel Parables in the Light of their Jewish Background (S.P.C.K., London, 1936, p. 202.)Google Scholar

^{page 459 note 6} Derrett, J. D. M., ‘Fresh Light on St. Luke xvi: I The Parable of the Unjust Steward; II Dives and Lazarus and the Preceding Sayings’, in New Testament Studies, 7 (1961), pp. 198–219 and 364–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 459 note 7} ibid., pp. 199 and 364.

^{page 459 note 8} L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, § 67. Interestingly, according to B. T. D. Smith, the Rabbis spoke of ‘mashal added to mashal like cord joined to cord’; cf. his The Parables of the Synoptic Gospels (Cambridge University Press, 1937), p. 14.

^{page 460 note 1} ibid., § 66.

^{page 460 note 2} cf. Strack, H. L., Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash (E.T. Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia, 1945), pp. 93–98Google Scholar. Cf. also J. L. Austin, op. cit., pp. 47ff.

^{page 460 note 3} J. D. M. Derrett, loc. cit., pp. 204–16.

^{page 460 note 4} ibid., pp. 202–3, 210, and 216–17.

^{page 460 note 5} ibid., p. 217.

^{page 460 note 6} ibid., pp. 206–9.

^{page 460 note 7} ibid., p. 219.

^{page 460 note 8} ibid., pp. 217–18 and 366.

^{page 461 note 1} ibid., p. 366.

^{page 461 note 2} ibid., p. 216. (See also below.)

^{page 461 note 3} cf. Davies, W. D., The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount (Cambridge University Press, 1964), p. 392Google Scholar.

^{page 461 note 4} cf. Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, pp. 141–142, and 160ffGoogle Scholar; and Hermeneutik, p. 223; J. Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 48–51, 77–81, and 149–51; and E. Linnemann, op. cit., pp. 73–81 and 114–19.

^{page 462 note 1} cf. Evans, D. D., The Logic of Self–Involvement (S.C.M. Press, London, 1963), in which the author provides a most useful discussion of J. L. Austin's work in relation to biblical language about creationGoogle Scholar.

^{page 462 note 2} See above.

^{page 462 note 3} E. Fuchs, Studies of the Historical Jesus, pp. 91, 95, 196, and especially 35–43, 161, and 209 (German, 288, 293, 411, 223–32, 370 and 426–7). Cf. also ‘The New Testament and the Hermeneutical Problem’, loc. cit., pp. 124–30, 136–45; and Hermeneutik, pp. 68, 119, 133 and 190.

^{page 462 note 4} On the distinction between illocutionary acts (performing an act in saying something) and perlocutionary acts (achieving effects by saying something) cf. J. L. Austin, op. cit., pp. 99–131.

^{page 463 note 1} ibid., pp. 150–63. Cf. also Fuchs's reference to judgment in Hermeneutik, p. 189.

^{page 463 note 2} For a slightly different list of illocutionary verbs, cf., for example, Alston, W. P., Philosophy of Language (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964), pp. 35–36.Google Scholar

^{page 463 note 3} Fuchs, E., Studies of the Historical Jesus, p. 35Google Scholar.

^{page 463 note 4} H.-G. Gadamer, op. cit., pp. 261 ff.

^{page 463 note 5} See above.

^{page 463 note 6} cf. Apel, K.-O., Analytic Philosophy of Language and the Geisteswissenschaften (E.T. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1967), pp. 35ff. and 51–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Apel interprets the later Wittgenstein, however, in a way which too nearly assimilates him into Peter Winch.

^{page 464 note 1} cf. Fuchs, , Studies of the Historical Jesus, pp. 91–93Google Scholar, and Manson, W., Jesus and the Christian, p. 53Google Scholar.

^{page 464 note 2} See above. Cf. also L. Wittgenstein op. cit., §§ 1–25 and 60–108.

^{page 464 note 3} J. L. Austin, op. cit., p. 45 (Austin's italics).

^{page 464 note 4} N. Malcolm describes Wittgenstein's typically unusual way of making this kind of point: ‘On one walk he “gave” to me each tree that we passed, with the reservation that I was not to … do anything to it, or prevent the previous owners from doing anything to it: with those reservations it was henceforth mine’ (Ludwig Wittgenstein: A Memoir (Oxford University Press, 1966), pp. 31–32).

^{page 464 note 5} cf. J. L. Austin, op. cit., pp. 23–24.

^{page 464 note 6} ibid., pp. 47–52.

^{page 465 note 1} ibid., pp. 53–55. Cf. also the extended discussion in T. F. Torrance, op. cit., pp. 247–80.

^{page 465 note 2} cf. Cadoux, A. T., The Parables of Jesus, their Art and Use (Clarke, London, n.d.), pp. 57–58Google Scholar; W. O. E. Oesterley, op. cit., pp. 3ff; G. V. Jones, op. cit., pp. 20–21, 24–25 and 110ff; and R. W. Funk, Language, Hermeneutic and Word of God, pp. 124ff. In complete contrast, cf. Jülicher's optimistic heading, ‘Das Wesen der Gleichnisreden Jesu’, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 25.

^{page 465 note 3} J. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 20.

^{page 465 note 4} Wilder, A. N., Early Christian Rhetoric (S.C.M. Press, London, 1964), p. 81Google Scholar.

^{page 466 note 1} cf. F. Waismann, op. cit., pp. 183–7.

^{page 466 note 2} Dibelius, M., A Fresh Approach to the New Testament and Early Christian Literature (E.T. Ivor Nicholson and Watson, London, 1936), p. 30 (my italics).Google Scholar

^{page 466 note 3} Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations, § 99Google Scholar.

^{page 466 note 4} ibid., §71.

^{page 467 note 1} Ullmann, S., Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning (Blackwell, Oxford 1962), p. 118Google Scholar. See pp. 116–28, and W. P. Alston, op. cit., pp. 84–106.

^{page 467 note 2} On the blurred boundaries of colour-words cf. 1Lyons, J., Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics (Cambridge University Press, 1968), pp. 55–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page 467 note 3} S. Ullmann, op. cit., pp. 168–9. Cf. also pp. 156–92; Black, M., The Labyrinth of Language (Pall Mall Press, London, 1968), pp. 97–113Google Scholar; and the comments of T. F. Torrance, op. cit., pp. 15–16, and Macquarrie, J., Principles of Christian Theology (S.C.M. Press, London, 1966), pp. 405–406Google Scholar.

^{page 467 note 4} cf. A. Jülicher, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 25ff and 103ff; R. Bultmann, op. cit., pp. 166ff; and J. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 12. In this connexion, however, many writers rightly distinguish between simile and metaphor. Cf. Funk, R. W., Language, Hermeneutic and Word of God, pp. 133–162Google Scholar.

^{page 468 note 1} cf. Fuchs's comments in ‘Jesus' Understanding of Time’, in Studies in the Historical Jesus, pp. 161–2 and 164–6.

^{page 468 note 2} It is fruitful, for example, to compare the logical relationship between the Bildhälfte and the Sachhälfte in parables with I. T. Ramsey's important suggestions about models and qualifiers in Religious Language: An Empirical Placing of Theological Phrases (S.C.M. Press, London, 1957).