Dr. Ediberto Lopez, Ph.D. Seminario Evangelico de Puerto Rico

CLASS ANTAGONISM AND EXPLOITATION IN JESUS' PARABLES: MK 12

In this essay, I will approach the parable of the so-called

Wicked -Tenants from a litarary and sociological perspectives.

Recent anthropological studies of pre-capitalist societies within

a social conflict perspective have empower biblical studies to re­

read Jesus' parables from a new perspective. Social anthropology

has allowed us to hear Jesus' traditions within their context of

class strug9le and exploitation.

According to Gerhard Lenski, in agrarian societies the lower

class was composed of the peasant, artisan, the unclean and

degraded, and expendables sectors. The peasant sector, in agrarian

societies, comprised the bulk of the population. Peasants paid

tribute from their production in rates of between 10 and 70

percent of their total output. These tributes included taxes

levied on other sectors of the agrarian society which were usually

shifted to the peasants and to the urban artisans. Another burden

levied on the peasant sector was forced labor on their landlords'

lands. Lenski states that "when land taxes, rents, and labor

services failed to secure the whole of the economic surplus, or

left the peasants time or energy to spare, still other taxes and

obligations were devised" (1966:269).

1

2

According to Alfoldy, the lower strata of the countryside

"constituted the overwhelming majority of the population of the

empire" (1988:142). It was comprised of nominally free peasants

and rural slaves. The nominally free peasants were tenants and

landless people-. Alfoldy evaluates the social conditions of the

rural population under the Roman empire and states that · it

included "the most oppressed social strata in the Roman empire"

(1988:145).

JESUS ARD 'l'BB PEASANTRY

The parable of the Wicked Tenants is placed in Mark

12.1-12, with parallels in Luke and Matthew, and in the Gospel of

Thomas 65,66. It is my contention that this parable is a story

about class antagonism and exploitation.

Class Confrontation and Violence: Mark 12.1-12

The parable's introduction is secondary. In Mark it is

introduced with the Markan formula of transition "and he began

to speak •••• "1

Mark situates this parable following the entrance of Jesus

into Jerusalem and his attack on the temple. Mark's setting

places Jesus in strong conflict with the authorities. This

parable is a preface to the passion narrative. Indeed, the

parable --as it is now situated-- is an explanation of the

assassination of Jesus by the Jewish and Roman authorities; it is

1See the same construction in Mark 1. 45; 2. 23; 4 .1; 5 .17, 20; 6.2,7,34,55; 0·.11,31,32; 10.20,32,41,42,47; 11.1s; 12.1; 13.5; 14.19,33,65,69,71; 15.8,18.

3

a parabolic passion prediction, as is 8.32, 9.31 and 10.31.

However, in terms of the parable itself, this context is

secondary, part of the evangelist's redaction of Mark's material.

Originally, parables were set to the oral context of Jesus and

early Christianity. The community passed them on without frames,

as in the Gospel of Thomas. Only later were they set into

narrative contexts, as they appear in the Synoptic Gospels.

The introductions of Luke and Matthew are also secondary to

the parable. Luke's introduction follows Mark's order, but now

the parable is spoken to the people, even though it is understood

as an attack on the scribes and the high priest (Luke 20.9,19).

One wonders if Luke has set this parable with the people at large

.as part of his understanding of the J~wish community as

responsible for the death of Jesus. In the case of ·Matthew, the

introduction is to a second parable. It comes after the s~ory of

the two sons. The parable is introduced by the Matthean formula,

"hear another parable." This Matthean formula occurs whenever he

narrates a series of parables (13.24, 31,33; 21.33). In the

Gospel of Thomas, the parable is introduced by, "he said," which

is the introductory word for the sayings of Jesus in this Gospel.

Mark 12.12, and its parallels in Luke and Matthew, are a

frame to the parable. Mark's frame in 12.12 serves as a

narrative hermeneutical key to the parable. The subject of the

clause is implicit in the verb 'ljntouv and refers back to the

indirect object (amoi,) in verse 1, which also refers back to

11.28, "the chief priest and the scribes and the elders." Mark

4

understood the parable as a teaching against these authorities

who are now the "wicked tenants". This framing is

secondary, as the Gospel of Thomas shows. Luke follows Mark

closely and possibly adds the motif of the "hour" (Luke

22.14,53). A major change in Matthew is that the adversaries are

named as "chief priests and the Pharisees." These are the

typical adversaries of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew. The other

major redaction of Matthew is the purpose clause explaining the

reason of the attachment of the crowds to Jesus; tmrl,1t;QOdrim:Jv

a'\}toy dx,ov.. In Matthew one of the titles of Jesus is prophet

(13.57; 21.11).

In Mark and its Lucan and Matthean parallels, the parable

concludes with a question of judgment about the plot (v.9). This

conclusion is missing in the gospel of Thomas. With this

redaction, Mark is able to condemn the Jewish authorities·who,

according to his narrative, finally killed the Son of God. The

concluding section of the narrative also helps us to date the

Markan Gospel because it seems to presuppose events after 70 CE.

In this sense it is a vaticinus ex eventu.

This Markan·conclusion redacts an end to the parable in

order to interpret it. Indeed, the idea of destroying the tenants

and giving the vineyard to others is an early Christian concern

foreign to the historical Jesus. Another interesting motif that

this conclusion has added to the parable is the coming of God to

judge the wicked tenant. The landowner has been assimilated into

the figure of God, an early Christian interpretation.

Luke added to the Markan text the answer in v.16b, "when

they heard this, they said, God forbid!" Inv. 19, the scribes

and the chief priests are the ones who understand the parable as

a charge against themselves.

In Matthew-, the parable is changed into a dialogue between

Jesus and his adversaries in which the adversaries judge and

convict themselves, as in Nathan's parable in the Hebrew Bible.

"They said to him, He will put those wretches to a miserable

death, and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give

him the fruits in their season." This is all Matthean

terminology. For example, the theme of the fruits appears

nineteen times in Matthew, while only.five in Mark and thirteen

in Luke. Another interesting redaction by Matthew is that, by

means of the fruit motif, he relates this narrative to the fig

tree story. The point is that Judaism has not produced the

fruits of justice required, and thus God has given the vineyard

to the Matthean (Christian?) community. Thus, the introductory

and concluding frames of the parable were part of its setting in

a narrative context, a context which itself was secondary.

5

In the Markan narrative, Ps. 118.22 is included as part of

the narrative. This psalm is quoted from the LXX, a use which

points to a secondary redaction. The quotation is the next

logion of Jesus after the parable of the tenants in the Gospel of

Thomas. This gospel is useful for giving us an insight into the

history of traditions. It seems to me that in the prehistory of

these sayings, the parable and the quotation of Psalm 118.22 were

6

in the first stage independent one of the other. At a second

stage, they were set next to each other, as is now the case in

the Gospel of Thomas. Still later, both independent traditions

were fused into one unit, as it stands in Mark. Our parable in

its earliest st-age was independent from the Psalm quotation.

Matthew and Luke follow Mark word by word in this quotation

of the Psalm. One wonders if for Matthew and Luke the quotation

of Scripture was more authoritative than the quotation of Mark

himself, and hence they did not redact the quotation as they

redacted Mark. Luke also uses a quotation of Psalm 118.22 in

Acts 4.11. There, it is stated clearly that Jesus is the stone

which the Jews rejected and who has become the head of the corner

(of the new temple of God?). Another redaction that Luke adds to

the quotation of the Psalm are the WQrds, "Every one who falls on

that stone will be broken in pieces; but when it falls on any one

it will crush him." The position that these adversaries had

taken against Jesus will determine their future. Another

redaction of Luke is his omission of Mark 12.11.

Matthew adds v.43, where Jesus says to his adversaries,

"therefore, I tell you, the Kingdom of God will be taken away

from you and given to a nation producing its fruits." This is a

Matthean life setting concern and thus a redaction, as discussed

above.

Mark 12.lb and parallels are a reference to Is 5.2 in the

LXX. The verbs ~. mzti8mc:Ev, ropuEzy. cox:o§ourmv. tg&;to are

obviously taken from the LXX. On the other hand, this allusion '

7

(paraphrase) is not in the text of the Gospel of Thomas. Thus, it

seems to me that this material is secondary. By mixing the

parable with Is 5.2, the parable takes on a new meaning. Isaiah

5 is an allegory of God as the owner of the vineyard and Israel

as the vineyard,who is bringing forth bad fruits. With the

inclusion of Isaiah 5, the parable has become an allegory of

God's dealing with Jewish authorities. The servants could be the

prophets and even John the Baptist. The "beloved" Son is

obviously an allusion to. Jesus who in the allegory was executed

by wicked tenants, i.e., the Jewish authorities.

Matthew transformed the landowner into a householder

( og:,§emt6~). This is a common Mat~hean title (eight times in

Matthew, one in Mark, four in Luke). Luke omits most of Isaiah

5.2 but adds to the parable that the landowner takes a trip to

another country who was XPQV®'ixavou,. This refers to the delay

of the parousia, a delay which was part of Luke's theological

theme. 2

In the Gospel of Thomas, the landowner.is a "good man". In

the Greco-Roman world, the upper classes received honor due to

their power. One of the signs of this honor and prestige was the

kind of status title, good (Xgncrt6,). According to Liddell and

Scott, gL xmmoi as oi a:ya8oi referred among other things to "well­

born, gentle ••• in a political sense, aristocrats" (1989ed: 4).

Therefore, a possible alternative translation to this "good

2I am following Conzelmann's (1961) interpretation about Luke and the delay of the parousia.

8

landowner" is "wealthy landowner". Mark, who is independent from

the Gospel of Thomas, does not have the landowner as a "good man"

(in a direct statement). Thus, I must conclude that the parable

might not have been of a "good landowner" but only of a

landowner.

We have noticed already that the verbs for the action of the

landowner in Mark follow Isa 5.2 in the LXX. In the Gospel of

Thomas, the actions of the landowner were only to possess a

vineyard that he gave to some farmers. Once we assume that

Mark's verbs are secondary, it seems that the Gospel of Thomas is

nearest to the earliest parable in this respect. Another detail

in the·Gospel of Thomas is the landowner's purpose in renting the

land to the tenants, "so that they would work it and he would

receive its profits from them." In Mark this clause is part of

the first servant commission. The Gospel of Thomas changes the

agrarian language, {ya mpg 1Xi>v 'Y'£Cll0'.Y(Pv MX~:a am> wv x:aP'fflPv ... , to

profits. It seems to me that the Markan language reflects better

Palestinian rural context, whereas the Gospel of Thomas probably

reflects an urban language. Thus, Mark's language seems earlier

and more authentic since the earliest context was agrarian.

The first sending of the servant(s) in Mark 12.2 is in all

the parallels and the Gospel of Thomas. Matthew changed the

clause and converted it into a temporal clause, "when the season

of fruit drew near." Another redaction of Matthew is the

transformation of the slave to the plural. This is Matthean

style. In other parables where the characters are slaves, they

9

are always in the plural (13.27; 18.23; 22.3; 25.14). Further,

Matthew uses the ~ as a possessive of the gains,

emphasizing that the vine is from the landowner.

The section in Mark 12.3-5 and parallels is different in

every tradition. For Mark there is a progression of events from

the beating and sending away empty-handed of the first slave, to

the wounding in the head and shameful treatment of the second

slave, to the death of the last slave, followed by a summary of

the whole scene. Since for Matthew, the commissioned were a

group of slaves, he carries out similar embellishments of the

whole scene. Now the first group of sl~ves received three

different punishments: one was beaten, one was murdered and

another was stoned. Then the "householder" sent more slaves who

received the same treatment as the first group. Matthew omits.

parts of the second commission of a slave and the third slave and

summary completely.

In the Lucan parallel, the first slave's actions follow

Mark, but the scene has a small change. Instead of wounding the

slave in the head (Mark), they again beat the second slave. In

the third slave section, instead of killing the slave (Mark),

they wound this one. Luke omits Mark's summary. In the Gospel

of Thomas, there are only two slaves and then the son. The first

slave, as in Mark, was beaten, but unlike Mark, "they almost

killed him." Thomas adds to the story that the second slave went

back and told this to the vineyard owner. Another difference is

that, in the Gospel of Thomas, the thoughts of the landowner are

10

told, "perhaps he did not know them." Thus, he sent another

servant. This other servant was only beaten, without mention of

murder.

Clearly this section of the parable has been embellished.

Matthew changes the original slave to a group, Mark has three

slaves in a growing tension plus a sununary, and Luke has three

slaves also in a growing tension, but not as much so as Mark. In

the Gospel of Thomas, the violence is explained as lack of

knowledge (wisdom or gnostic?). Crossan points out that the two

groups of Matthew are a reference in his allegory to the former

and latter prophets in the Hebrew Bible. Be also points out that

Luke is more realistic compared to Mark, whose last slave

murdered is a reference to John the Baptist (1973:88).

When we take out all this secondary material, the parable's

hypothetical core stands probably as follows:

Be sent his slave so that the farmers would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard, and they sent him away with empty hands. Be sent another slave and they beat him.

Mark 12.6-8 and parallels is the climax of the parable. For

Mark, the landowner still had one son, his 'flX1t1IC0,. 3 This

adjective is conononly attached to the title son in Mark (Mark

1.11; 9.7). In this way, Mark converted this parable into

another passion prediction (Mark 8.31; 9.32; 10.32). Matthew

follows Mark closely. On the other hand, Luke calls the

3 According to Brad H. Young ( 1989: 285) , the Greek term aqapetos can refer to the Hebrew term yahid which means "only son".

11

landowner 61C'6pux; 'tQ'.U ~V9'• Obviously, Luke is associating God

with the landowner. Luke also alludes to Isa 5.5 (LXX), ti1t01.i)qm.

In Isaiah this was a direct statement, "I will announce to you

what I shall do", but in Luke it is a question. The Gospel of

Thomas is sober. "The master sent his Son. He said, perhaps

they will respect my Son. Those farmers seized him, they killed

him, since they knew he was the heir of the vineyard. 0 Apart

from the title "Master", the Gospel of Thomas seems to be nearer

to the earliest stages of the parable in this section.

I think that the oldest hypothetical parable that we can

·reconstruct is as follows;

A (wealthy?) man had a vineyard. Be let it out to farmers and went into another country. Be sent his slave so that they could get from the farmers some of the fruit of the vineyard. And they sent him away empty-handed. Be sent another slave and the farmers beat him and sent him away empty-handed. Then· the master sent his son. Be said, perhaps they will respect 1"Y son. But the farmers seized him, and killed him, since they knew he was the heir of the vineyard.

Crossan (1973:93) has presented the following structure for

the parable:

(1) Setting: The landowner and the farmer tenants

(2) the first servant

(3) the second servant

(4) the son of the landowner

Once we rebuild the hypothetical, earliest parable, we notice

that the genre is a parable, not an allegory as in Mark and the

other synoptics. The multiple attestation of independent

traditions, such as Mark and the Gospel of Thomas, show that a

12

very early tradition about Jesus and the conflict between

peasantry and wealthy landowners was shared among early

Christians.

If we read this parable from the peasant's point of view, we

notice that in the class structure of an agrarian society this is

a narrative that tells a story of resistance and confrontation

between landowner and the peasantry, arising from the tributary

relationship. The antagonism is such that the parable evolves in

a "spiral of violence" and ends with the assassination of the

landowner's only son. This parable was so scandalous for early

Christians that they s~oothed it and converted it into a

christological allegory. As early Christian communities became

more city bound as well as upper class dominated, the parable

became more embarrassing. The social stratification of an

agrarian society expressed in the parable was projected onto the

deity (the good landowner) and violence between the peasantry and

the heir of the landowner was transformed into a christological

passion prediction.

The parable was recast so well into early Christian faith

and self understanding that even modern scholars have interpreted

it as a passion prediction (Young 1989), or as a datum of Jesus'

self conception (Charlesworth 1988). On the other hand, this

allegorical story about Jesus' self-conscious~ess and/or Jesus'

passion prediction has been understood by some modern scholars as

the basis for the rejection of the authenticity of this

parable.' But I would suggest that this is a parable not about

Jesus' self consciousness or passion prediction, but about the

antagonism between Palestinian peasantry and the upper class

landowners.

13

J.E. Stambaugh and D.L. Balch have given us a view of the

situation of peasants in Palestine in the world of Jesus. After

Israel became a colony of Rome, a considerable number of Jewish

peasants were made landless. In Herod's kingdom there was a

trend toward large holdings of land by the rich, and cultivation

of those lands by tenant farmers •

. This trend excited.the savage hostility between landlords and renters •••• Small landowners and tenants often were forced to ask for loans. The pressures for these loans was ••• intense •••• Economic strains ••• produced deep antagonism between the owners of large rural properties and their tenants or debtors.- These owners often lived in the cities, sometimes foreign. ones •••• This struggle for scarce land was one factor that stimulated the revolutionary cause of Hezekiah and John Gischala in Upper Galilee. (1986:91-92)

If we take the peasant sector's point of view, our parable

describes the antagonism between the peasantry and the upper

classes. The continual sending of surplus collectors (including

the heir) by the landowner witnesses to the exploitation of

tenants by the landowner. That the tenants resolved to oppose

the exaction of surplus witnesses to the tenants' response to the

exploitation to which they were subjected. Indeed, in this case

4 See R. w. Funk, et al (1988:50-51). According to the Jesus Seminar report, only the version of the Gospel of Thomas preserved an authentic parable of Jesus.

14

both opponents are struggling for the land output. The plot of

this binary opposition is the escalation of violence. A reading

from an upper class point of view has converted our peasants into

the wicked tenants. A reading from the peasants' point of view

shows the response of the exploited to a tributary relationship

with the absentee landowner.

The parable's tension (class antagonism) is solved with the

assassination of the heir. Gerd Theissen points to the situation

that is addressed here:

The aggressiveness of the country population toward the masters who profited from their work was often reinforced by absenteeism. This absenteeism in fact helped on the transition from slavery to colonization, but it had disadvantages for the smaller tenants in Palestine: the absentee landlords --who were often . foreigners-- were interested only in profit, and not in the prosperity of their possessions (1978:56).

In this parable we are able to hear the voice o~ the

oppressed peasantry in the earliest traditions about Jesus. The

parable was a scandal to the ears of the landowner class (and all

those who sided with the landowner, in the parable context and in

our context). The exploitation to which the landowner submitted

the peasantry backfired in a terrible manner.

What the parable does not allow us to know (in the earliest

tradition) is the result of this violence. Early Christianity,

in a different context, knew the outcome. The peasants would be

repressed and exploited even further. "What will che owner of

the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the tenants and give

the vineyard to others" (Mark 12.9). Nevertheless, the parable

brings forth a message, that the course of class antagonism

between landowners and peasantry was confrontation.

Confrontation meant exploitation, violence and resistance to

exploitation and structural violence. Hence, the parable

confronted Jesus' contemporaries with a serious dilemma: no

justice, no peace.

Conclusion

15

In this essay, we have examined several traditions about

Jesus and the lower class. We can make the following observations

in regard to Jesus' response to the lower class situation:

(1) Jesus responded to the social stratification and social

class conflict of his context;

(2) Jesus acknowledged the class confrontation and violence

between the propertied class ~nd the peasantry;

(3) Jesus acknowledged the exploitation and the plight of

the peasantry in their economic relationship with the propertied

class;

(4) Jesus used his teaching as tools to facilitate the

generation of class consciousness among the lower classes.

Alavi, Hamza 1987a

1987b

Alfoldy, Geza 1988

1

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Peasantry and Capitalism: A Marxist Discourse." Pp. 185-196 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

"Village Factions." Pp. 346-356 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

The Social History of Rome. Maryland: The John Hopkins University Press.

Anderson·, Perry. 1974 Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism. London:

Amin, Samir 1980

Applebaum, s. 1987

Verso.

Class and Nation, Historically and in the Current Crisis. New York/London: Monthly Review Press.

"Economic Life in Palestine." Pp. 631-700 in The Jewish People in the First Century. Vol II. Ed. s. Safrai et al. Assen: Van Gorcum.

Bammel, E. and Moule, C.F.D. 1984 ed. Jesus and the Politics of his Day. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Barrington, Moore, Jr. 1967 "Revolution of the Oppressed: A Case Made."

Bartra, Roger 1969 ed.

Belo, Fernando 1981

Pp. 365-366 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

El Modo de Producci6n Asiatico. Mexico: Ediciones Era.

A Materialist Reading of the Gospel of Mark. New York: Orbis Books.

2

Boers, Hendrikus 1989 Who was Jesus? The Historical Jesus and the

Synoptic Gospels. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers.

Boismard, M.E. 1977

Borg, Marcus J.

Sin6psis de los Cuatro Evangelios. Espana: Desclee De Brouwer.

1987 Jesus a New Vision Spirit, Culture and the Life of Discipleship. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers.

Bottomore, Tom 1962

1968

1976

1983 ed.

1988 _ed.

Breech, James 1983

Brown, John P. 1983

Introducci6n a la Sociologia. Barcelona: Ediciones Peninsula.

"Marxist Sociology." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Pages 45-53.

La Sociologia Marxista. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.

A Dictionary of Marxist Thought. Massachusetts: H~rvard University Press.

Interpretations of Marx. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

~T=h~e __ S~i~l~e~n~c~e .......... o~f ____ J~e ____ s~u~s_. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

"Techniques of Imperial Control: The Background of the Gospel Even." Pp. 357-377 in The Bible and Liberation: Political and Social Henneneutics. Ed. Norman K. Gottwald. New York: Orbis Press.

Charlesworth, James H. 1988 Jesus Within Judaism. New York: Doubleday.

Clark Kee, Howard 1970 Jesus in History. New York:Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich, Publishers.

1989a Knowing the Truth. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

3

Cohen, S.J.D. 1987 From the Maccabees to the Mishnah.

Philadelphia:The Westminster Press.

Conzelmann, Hans 1961 The Theology of St. Luke. San Francisco:

Harper & Row, Publishers.

Croce, Benedetto 1913 "Concerning the Limitation of the

Materialistic Theory of History." Pp. 103-110 in Interpretations of Marx. Ed. T. Bottomore. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Crossan, John Dominic 1973 In Parables, The Challenge of the Historical

Jesus. San Francisco: Harper & Row.

1991

Davies, s. L. · 1983

de Ste. Croix, 1981

Derrett, J.D. 1978

Desai, Meghnad 1979

The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco.

The Gospel of Thomas and Christian Wisdom. New York: The Seabury Press.

G.E.M. The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World: From the Archaic Age to the Arab Conquests. New York: Cornell University Press.

Studies in the New Testament. Vol. I-IV. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

"Marx's Political Economy." Pp. 81-91 in Interpretations of Marx. Ed. T. Bottomore. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Divitt;ioglu, 1969

Sencer

Dodd, C. B. 1974

"Modelos Econ6micos a Partir del Modo de Producci6n Asiatico." Pp. 157-172 in El Modo de Producci6n Asiatico. Ed. R. Bartra. Mexico: Ediciones Era.

Las Parabolas del Reino. Madrid: Ediciones Cristiandad.

Edwards, D.R. 1988

Fanon, Frantz 1967-

Figes, Orlando 1987

4

"First Century Urban/rural Relations is Lower Galilee: Exploring the Archeological and Literary Evidence." SBL Seminar Papers 1988. California: Scholar Press.

The Wretched of the Earth. Penguin.

"V.P. Danilov on the Analytical Distintion between Peasants and Farmers." Pp. 121-124 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Finley, Moses I. 1973 The Ancient Economy. Berkeley: University of

California Press.

1991 Politics in the Ancient World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fioravanti, Eduardo 1972 El Concepto de Medo de Producci6n. Barcelona:

Flusser, David 1986

Freire, Paulo 1970

Ediciones Peninsula.

"Aesop's Miser and the Parable of the Talents." Pp. 9-25 in Parable and Story in Judaims and Christianity. Ed. C. Thoma and M. Wyschogrod. New York: Paulist Press.

Pedagogia del Oprimido. Mexico: Siglo XXI.

Funk, Robert W. et al. 1988 The Parables of Jesus. California: Polebridge

Press.

Gafni, I. 1984

Gager, John G. 1979

"The Historical Background." Pp. 1-32 in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period. Ed. M. Stone. Assen: Van Gorcum.

"Social Description and Sociological Explanation in the Study of Early Christianity: A Review Essay." Pp. 428-440 in The Bible and Liberation: Political and

Social Hermeneutics. Ed. Norman K. Gottwald. New York: Orbis Books.

Gardner, Jane F. & Wiedemann, Thomas 1991 The Roman Household: A Sourcebook. London:

Routledge.

Garnsey, Peter 1988 , Famine and Food Supply in the Greco-Roman

World: Responses to Risk and Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Garnsey, Peter and Saller Richard 1987 The Roman Empire: Economy, Society and

Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Garnsey, Peter and Woolf, G. 1990 "Patronage of the Rural Poor in the Roman

World." Pp. 153-170 in Patronage in Ancient Society. Ed. A. Wallace-Hadrill. London: Routledge.

Gnilka, Joachim

5

1978-79 El Evangelio segun Marcos. Vol. I-II. Madrid: Ediciones Sigueme.

Godelier, 1968

Maurice

1971

1974

1986

"The Concept of the Asiatic Mode of Production and Marxist Models of Social Evolution." Pp. 209-257 in Relations of Production: Marxist Approaches to Economic Anthropology. Ed. D. Seddon. Great Britain: Frank Cass & Co.

Teoria Marxista de las Sociedades Precapitalistas. Barcelona: Editorial Laia.

Economia, Fetichismo y Religion en las Sociedade~ Primitivas. Mexico: Siglo XXI.

The Mental and the Material: Thought, Economy and Society. London: Verso.

Gottwald, Norman K. 1983 ed. The Bible and Liberation. New York: Orbis

Books.

1985a The Hebrew Bible a Soci~-literary Introduction. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1985.

1985b

1986a

1986b

"Contemporary Studies on Social Class and ·social Stratification and a Hypothesis about Social Class in Monarchic Israel." ASOR-SBL Seminar Paper.

"Social Scientific Criticism of the BB and its Social World: The Israelity Monarchy." Semeia 37:18.

"The Participation of Free Agrarians in the Introduction of Monarchy to Ancient Israel: an Application of H.A. Landsberger's Framework for the Analysis of Peasant Movement." Semeia 37:77-106.

6

1987 "Sociology of Ancient Israel." Forthcoming in The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Doubleday; Garden City.

Hengel, Martin 1974

1989

Hilferding, R. 1954

Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

The Zealots. Edinburgh: T & T Clark Ltd.

"The M~terialistic Conception of History." Pp. 111-120 in Interpretations of Marx. Ed. T. Bottomore. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Himmelweit, Susan 1983 "Exploitation." Pp. 157-158 in A Dictionary

of Marxist Thought. Ed. Tom Bottomore. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Hobsbawn, Eric J. 1959 Primitive Rebels: Studies in Archaic Forms of

Social Movement in the 19th and 20th Centuries. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

Hollenbach, Paul w. 1979 "Social Aspects of John the Baptizer's

Preaching Mission in the Context of Palestinian Judaism." Pp. 850-875 in Auftieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt, II 19, 1. Ed. Hildegard Temporini and Wolgang Haase.

1981 "Jesus, Demoniacs, and Public Authorities: A Socio-Historical Study. Pp. 567-588 in JAAR, XLIX 4.

1982

1983

1987

Holmberg, B. 1990

Hopwood, Keith 1990

Horbury, w. 1984

7

"The Conversion of Jesus: From Jesus the Baptizer to Jesus the Bealer." Pp. 196-219 in Auftieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt, II 25, 1. Ed. Wolgang Haase.

"Recent Historical Jesus Studies and the Social Sciences." SBL Seminar Papers 1983. California: Scholar Press.

"Defining Rich and Poor." SBL Seminar Paper 1987. Scholar Press: California.

Sociology and the New Testament an Appraisal. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

"Bandits, Elites and Rural Order." Pp. 171-187 in Patronage in Ancient Society. Ed. A. Wallace-Hadrill. London: Routledge.

"The Temple Tax." Pp. 265-286 in Jesus and the Politics of his Day. Ed. E. Bammel and C.F.D. Moule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Horsley, Richard 1987 Jesus and the Spiral of Violence. San

Francisco: Harper & Row, Publishers.

1988

1989

"Bandits, Messiahs, and Longshormen: Popular Unrest in Galilee Around the Time of Jesus." SBL Seminar Papers 1988. California: Scholar Press.

Sociology and the Jesus Movement. New York: Crossroad.

Horsley, Richard & Hanson, J.S. 1985 Bandits, Prophets and Messiahs. Minneapolis:

Winston Press.

Jeremias, Joachim 1962 Jerusalen en los Tiempos de Jesus. Madrid:

1965a

1971

Ediciones Cristiandad.

Las Parabolas de Jesus. Pamplona: Editorial Verbo Divino.

Teologia del Nuevo Testamento. Vol. 1. Salamanca: Ediciones Sigueme.

8

Josephus, Flavius 1936 The Jewish War. Books 1-7. Loeb Classical

Library. Greek Text and translation by H. St. J. Thackeray.

1937

Kerblay, Basile

Jewish Antiquities. Books IX-XX. Loeb Classical Library. Greek Text and translation by Ralph Marcus.

1987 "Chayanov and the Theory of Peasant Economy." Pp. 176-184 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Kyrtatas, Demitris J. 1987 The Social Structure of the Early Christian

Communities. London: Verso.

Kolakowski, Leszek 1960 "Ideology and Theory." Pp. 295-298 in

Interpretations of Marx. Ed. Tom Bottomore. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Lagerquist, 1991

Laura "The Parable of the Talents. A Parable for Those Who Have Waited Too·Long or A Parable for Those Who Work, and Watch and Wait? Final Assigment -HBU330 New York Theological Seminary. Unpublished Essay·.

Lenski, Gerhard E. 1966 Power and ·Privilege: A Theory of Social

Stratification. North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press.

Lichtheim, George 1963 "Marx and the Asiatic Mode of Production."

Linnemann, Eta 1966

Pp. 121-138 in Interpretations of Marx. Ed. T. Bottomore. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Parables of Jesus Introduction and Exposition. London: SPCK.

Lipset, Seymour M. 1968 "Stratification, Social: Social Class."

International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Page 296-316.

MacMullen, Ramsay 1974 Roman Social Relations: 50 B.C. to A.O. 284.

New Haven: Yale University Press.

Maduro, Otto 1982

Malina, Bruce 1981

Marx, Karl 1947

1971

1972

1972

1975

9

Religion and Social Conflict. New York: Orbis Books.

The NT World, Insights from Cultural Antropology. Atlanta: John Knox Press.

The German Ideology. New York: International Publishers.

Elementos Fundamentales para la Critica de la Economia Politica {Grundisse). Vol. 1-3. Ciudad Mexico: Siglo XXI.

"A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy." Pp. 3-8 in The Marx-Engels Reader. Published in 1859. Ed. R.C. Tucker. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

"Manifesto of the Communist Party." Pp.469-500 in The Marx-Engels Reader. Published in 1848. Ed. R.C. Tucker. New York: W.W. Norton

. & Company.

El Capital. Vol. 1-3. Ciudad Mexico: Siglo ~XI.

Marx, Karl and Hobsbawm, Eric 1965 Pre-capitalist Economic Formations. New

York:International Publishers.

McGovern, A.F. 1980

Meier, J.P 1991

Memmi, Albert 1969

Marxism: An American Christian Perspective. New York: Orbis Books.

A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Vol. I. New York: Doubleday.

Retrato del Colonizado. Buenos Aires: Ediciones de la Flor.

Meyer, Alfred G. 1968 "Marxism." International Encyclopedia of the

Social Science. Pages 40-45.

Milavec, Aaron A.

10

1986 "A Fresh Analysis of the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen in the Light of Jewish­Catholic Dialogue." Pp. 81-117 in Parable and Story in Judaims and Christianity. Ed.' C. Thoma and M. Wyschogrod. New York: Paulist Press.

Myers, C. 1987

Neusner, Jacob 1984

Oakman, Douglas

Binding the Strong Man, a Political Reading of the Sayings of Jesus. New York: Orbis Books.

Judaism in the Beginning of Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

1986 Jesus and the Economic Questions of his Day. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press.

Overman, J. A. 1988 "Who Were the First Urban thristians? .

Petrovic, Gajo 1967

Rader, M. 1979

Riches, John 1988

Urbanizationin Galilee in the First Century." SBL Seminar Papers 1988. California: Scholar Press.

"Marx's Concept of Man." Pp. 141-145 in Interpretations of Marx. Ed. T. Bottomore. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Marx's Interpretation of History. New York: Oxford University Press.

"Parables and the Search for a New Community." Pp. 235-263 in The Social World of Formative Christianity and Judaism. Ed. J. Neusner et al. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Rohrbaugh, Richard L. 1992 "A Peasant Reading of The Parable of the

Talents/Pounds: A Text of Terror?" Biblical Theological Bulletin. Forthcoming.

Sanders, E.P. 1985 Jesus and Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress

Press.

11

1992 Judaism: Practice & Belief 63 BCE - 66 CE. London/Philadelphia: SCM Press/Trinity Press International.

Sanders, J.A. 1962 "Tax, Taxes." Pp. 520-522 in IBD. Vol 4. Ed.

G.A. Buttrick et al. Nashville: Abingdon.

Saul, J.S. and Woods, R. 1987 "African Peasantries." Pp. 80-88 in Peasants

& Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Schmidt, Thomas E. 1987 Hostility to Wealth in the Synoptic Gospels.

Sheffield: Sheffield Academy Press.

Schottroff, w. & Stegemann, w. 1984 God of the Lowly. Maryknoll: Orbis Books.

Schottroff, Luise & Stegemann, Wolfgann 1986 Jesus and the Hope of the Poor. Maryknoll:

Orbis Books.

Schottroff, Luise 1984 "Human Solidarity and the Goodness of God:

Schurer, Emil, 1985

Scott, James s.

The Parable of the Workers in the-vineyard," Pp. 129-147 ·in God of the Lowly: Socio­Historical Interpretations of the Bible. Ed. w. Schottroff and w. Stegemann. Maryknoll: Orbis Press.

Vermes, G., et. al. Historia del Pueblo Judio en Tiempos de Jesus. Vol. I and II. Madrid: Ediciones Cristiandad.

1987 "Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Struggle, Meaning and Deeds." Pp. 343-3•5 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Scott, Bernard Brandon 1989 Hear Then the Parable. Philadelphia: Fortress

Press.

Scroggs, Robin 1980. "The Sociolical Interpretation of the New

Testament: The Present State of Research." Pp. 337-356 in The Bible and Liberation:

Seddon, David 1978 ed.

12

Political and Social Hermeneutics. Ed. Norman K. Gottwald. Maryknoll: Orbis Press.

Relations of Production: Marxist Approaches to Economic Anthropology. London: Frank Cass and Company Limited.

Segundo, Juan Luis 1985 The Historical Jesus of the Synoptics. New

York: Orbis Books.

Shanin, Teodor 1966

1980

1987 ed.

Snodgrass, K. 1983

"Peasantry in Political Action." Pp. 357-364 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

"Short Historical Outline of Peasant Studies." Pp. 467-475 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Peasants & Peasant Societies. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

The Parable of the Wicked Tenants. Tubinguen: J.C.B. Mohr.

Stambaugh, J.E. and Balch, David L. 1986 The NT in Its Social Environment.

Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

Stegemann, Wolgang 1984 The Gospel and the Poor. Philadelphia:

Stern, D. 1986a

1986b

Stern, M. 1987

Fortress Press.

"Jesus' Parables from the Perspective of Rabbinic Literature: The Example of the Wicked Husbandment." Pp. 42-80 in Parable and Story in Judaims and Christianity. Ed. C. Thoma and M. Wyschogrod. New York: Paulist Press.

"The Rabbinic Parable: From Rhetoric to Poetics." SBL Seminar Papers 1986. California: Scholar Press.

"Aspects of Jewish Society: The Priesthood and other Classes. Pp. 561-630 in The Jewish

Theissen, Gerd 1978

1982

1983

1986,

1991

People in the First Century. Vol II. Ed. s. Safrai et al; Assen: Van Gorcum.

Sociology of Early Palestinian Christianity. Philadelpia: Fortress Press.

13

"The Sociological Interpretation of Religious Traditions: Its Methodological Problems as Exemplified in Early Christianity." Pp. 38-58 in The Bible and Liberation: Political and Social Hermeneutics. Ed. Norman K. Gottwald. New York: Orbis Books.

The Miracle Stories of the Early Christian Tradition. Philadelphia: Fortress.

The Shadow of the Galilean. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

The Gospel in Context: Social and Political History in the Synoptic Tradition. Minneapolis:Fortress Press.

Thoma, Clemens & Wyschogrod, Michael 1986ed Parable and Story in Judaism and

Christianity. New York: Paulist Press.

Thoma, Clemens 1986

Thorner, Daniel

''Literary and Theological Aspects of the Rabbinic Parables." Pp. 26- 41 in Parable and Story in Judaims and Christianity. Ed. C. Thoma and M. Wyschogrod. New York: Paulist Press.

1987 "Peasant Economy as a Category in History" Pp. 62-68 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Tilly, Charles 1987

Varga, Eugenio 1969

"Conflict, Resistance and Collective Action versus Capitalization and Statemaking." Pp. 340-342 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

"El Modo de Produccion Asia.tico." Pp 81-99 in El Modo de Produccion Asia.tico: Problemas de la Historia de los Paises Coloniales. Ed. R. Bartra. Mexico: Ediciones Era.

Vermes, Geza 1973

Via, Dan Otto 1967

14

Jesus the Jew. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

The Parables their Literary and Existencial Dimension. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Wallace-Hadrill, Andrew 1990 ed. Patronage in Ancient Society. London:

Wolf, Eric R. 1982

1987

Young, Brad H. 1989

Routledge.

Europe and the People without History. California: University of California Press.

"On Peasant Rebellions." Pp. 367-374 in Peasants & Peasant Societies. Ed. T. Shanin. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Jesus and His Jewish Parables: Rediscovering the Roots of Jesus' Teaching. New York/Mahwah: Paulist Press.