100. Chapter 41 - The Parable of the Prodigal Son

Chapter 41 - The Parable of the Prodigal Son

Luke 15:1-32 The Title The titles which have been placed over the parables are of such ancient origin, such universal acceptance, and so appropriate that we seldom pause to consider other titles which might be used. Since the prodigal son is the chief actor in the parable, his name is naturally placed in the title. But in light of the occasion, the circumstances which produced these three parables, and the purpose Jesus had in mind, it might be called “The Parable of the Elder Brother.” He remains the question mark at the end of the parable. Jesus was being criticized by the Pharisees because He moved freely among the multitude regardless of their state or character. The Pharisees sought to prove their own righteous character by keeping apart from “the publicans and sinners” and by keeping them apart from the select circles. They made a double charge against Jesus: (1) He permitted sinful people to come into His company. (2) He went into their midst and ate with them. In the parable of the prodigal son Jesus sought to demonstrate to the Pharisees what sort of people they themselves were.

“A certain man had two sons, and both of them were sinners. The prodigal was lost in the far country; the elder brother was lost in his Father’s house. Since Jesus was seeking above all else to portray the love of God and to get the Pharisees to understand the divine purpose and result in His association with sinners, the last parable might be called “The Parable of the Loving Father.” Because of the central theme in all three parables, they might be called “Parables of the Lost.” The Three Parables The differences in the three parables illustrate again the warning that the details of a parable must not be pushed to extreme identification. It is immediately apparent that the first two parables are not completely parallel to the third. The sheep willfully goes astray, but is carried back helpless by the faithful shepherd. What a chasm separates this from the resolute decision: “I will arise and go to my father.” The coin is completely without any sort of intelligence and choice and is swept out of its hiding place by violence. Even the parable of the prodigal son gives no full presentation of the gospel. There is no Son who dies for the redemption of the two sinful sons; there is no message or appeal sent to the far country to represent the gospel invitation. The limitation of parables to simple objectives is the very secret of their power. Vision is concentrated on a central principle. To have introduced a Son to die for the redemption of the other two sons might have illustrated the atonement, but it would have blurred the incarnation. How could the divine character of the only begotten Son of God have been set forth? The principle which is constant in all three parables is the unfailing effort of the one who seeks the lost. The importance of a human soul and the joy manifest when the lost is found are seen throughout the three parables The Lost Sheep

“What man of you, having a hundred sheep, and having lost one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?” (Luke 15:4). This parable is an appeal to their universal experience. It may seem like great folly to leave ninety-nine sheep in the wilderness exposed to all its dangers and to go in search of one lost sheep. But the implication is that there is a secure fold here in the wilderness where the ninety and nine will be safe. Until he find it emphasizes the determination and persistence of the shepherd. In a similar parable delivered on a different occasion Jesus said of this loving shepherd: “And if so be that he find it” (Matthew 18:13). Ultimate tragedy instead of supreme joy may be the outcome. The desert is pictured as the customary pasturage in the spring. It also is the appropriate setting for the sheep that is lost amid all its perils, and that is found at such great cost. The great love of the shepherd is shown by: (1) his great anxiety; (2) his long journey; (3) his persistent search; (4) his carrying back the lost sheep on his shoulders; (5) his call to his friends to rejoice with him “when he cometh home” (Luke 15:6). Since the scene is laid in the wilderness, it is not clear whether this is a fold where other shepherds can rejoice with him or a delayed rejoicing at home as he recounts his harrowing experience in the desert. Friends and neighbors suggests the return from the desert to the home village. “Joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine righteous persons, who need no repentance” (Luke 15:7). But who is there that is so righteous he needs no repentance? Is not this the very error Jesus is seeking to correct in the thinking of the Pharisees? Perhaps this is an ironical thrust at the Pharisees self-complacency. The Pharisees were far from righteous and were but few in number so that the one-hundred-to-one percentage is not in evidence.

Cyril, Alexander, and Ambrose attempted to identify the ninety-nine as the angels and the one which was lost as the human race. But the text says, “one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine righteous persons, who need no repentance.” The reference is to men in a state of probation, where they can repent. It is better to take the principles taught and not seek to identify each detail. The principles are the dreadful condition of the lost, the unfailing love and persistent effort of the shepherd, and the great joy that attends the final rescue. The general difference between the ninety and nine sheep safe in the fold and the one lost in the deadly peril pictures the contrast between the man who is without God and without hope and the Christian who zealously follows Christ. Who need no repentance no more denies that all men need daily to pray for forgiveness than the shepherd’s carrying the sheep back bodily denies the freedom of the will. The Lost Coin

It is plain that an inanimate piece of money is bound to fall short of detailed representation of the moral nature of man. The coin was not responsible for its being lost, nor did it have any part in its recovery. But here are two familiar illustrations out of everyday life, the principles of which are plain. Attempting to press the details of any parable into exact parallels is sure to bring difficulty. In these first two parables, a man is the actor in the first; a woman, in the second. Both were seeking valuable lost property, but the sheep had gone astray because of its own stubborn folly; the coin was lost through neglect or misfortune of the woman. The sheep could suffer the evil results of going astray; the coin could not. Plummer holds that “...while the man might be moved by pity rather than by self-interest to bring back the sheep, the woman must he moved by self-interest alone to recover the coin.” Kindness to animals and the shepherd’s love for each of his sheep do enter into the first parable, but Plummer forgets that this coin may have been dedicated to the service of God, or to some noble cause of helping the poor. The woman’s main grief may have been frustration of a good purpose. It does not follow that her motive is purely selfish. As a result of the above discrimination Plummer makes, he says that “...the woman represents the Church rather than Divine Wisdom, if she represents anything at all.” But is the church moved by self-interest and not by pity in its search for lost souls? It is better not to attempt to identify such details. The principles are the same in both parables The coin was a Greek drachma worth about 16 cents. Some suggest that this was one of the silver pieces of her bridal headdress and hence of inestimable value, as its loss would mar the whole, but the parable does not imply this in any way. The Search The details of the search are true to the background. The streets were dark and narrow; the houses were built against one another; windows were rare; hence it was necessary to light a lamp, even if the search was carried on during the day. Some suggest a lesson from the sheep straying from the fold and the coin being lost in the house; men and women may be lost in the church as well as out of it. It is doubtful whether this is meant, although it appears clearly in the parable of the lost sons. For the woman to have invited in her friends to rejoice with her is as natural as for the shepherd to call in his comrades. The persistence both of the shepherd and the woman is of primary importance. Ira Sankey’s grand hymn “The Ninety and Nine” deserves to be read and sting frequently. The woman moved everything in the house rather than give up her search for the coin. Trench remarks, “The charge against the Gospel is still the same, that it turns the world upside down.” The angels rejoicing in heaven while men and women rejoice over the recovery on earth is a very touching picture. Great joy as well as great sorrow seeks sympathetic companionship. The keen interest of the angels in the even transpiring on earth is noteworthy. The Prodigal Son The Parable of the Prodigal Son has a separate introduction — “And he said” (Luke 15:11). This does not mean that the parable was spoken on a different occasion; but emphasis is given to the supreme character of the more direct reply which Jesus gave to the criticism of the Pharisees The three parables have the same objective. God’s part in saving lost men and His great love in seeking and saving are shown forth in the first two parables Since human beings are the lost in the third parable, it is possible for the details to fit more closely. The freedom of the will, man’s responsibility for his lost condition, his deliberate choice of repentance and return to God, and God’s great love for lost mankind are clearly set forth in the Parable of the Prodigal Son. The Inheritance

“Father, give me the portion of thy substance that falleth to me” (Luke 15:12). This seems to propose that the father abdicate and divide up the estate, but at the close of the parable the father is still in charge of the home and farm. We are not told that the father divided his entire estate, but “he divided unto them his living.” The elder son was given his proper share of whatever was distributed. The Jewish law granted to the younger son half of what the eldest son received (i.e., one-third of the total; cf. Deuteronomy 21:17). The older son evidently did not tell the truth in his complaints at the close of the parable, “Thou never gavest me….” The Far Country

“And not many days after, the younger son gathered all together and took his journey into a far country” (Luke 15:13). If the portion bestowed by his father included real estate, it would have to be disposed of to have all his possessions in ready cash. His reason for going into a far country is evident; he wanted to get out of his father’s presence and away from all who knew him. He had definite plans for seeing the world and sharing all it could offer. The sharp contrast between gathered all together and wasted his substance is impressive. What had been given to him he scattered quickly and at random. The word with riotous living means “living like a prodigal or a spendthrift.” The word can have a passive meaning: “living like one who cannot be saved,” i.e., abandoned, hell-bent. The grass usually looks greener on the other side of the fence, but the prodigal soon found that the far country was no paradise. At the very time that his funds were exhausted and his need desperate, the country came into the grip of a dreadful famine. It is to the young man’s credit and proof that his character and will power were not utterly corrupted that he did not turn to crime or to begging. Highway robbers and hobos are made of this sort of background. He sought work and found the lowest type of work which a Jew could undertake — feeding swine. His high living had gained him no permanent friends. When the juice had been squeezed from the lemon, his fair-weather friends threw away the rind. Evidently he secured employment from a heathen. The second best gift to a man in need is a job. The first gift is the gospel of Christ to bring him to God. The Husks With the husks that the swine did eat is a curious mistranslation. The pods of the carob tree are shaped something like a lima bean. These were shaken off the tree by the prodigal so the pigs could eat them. This tree abounds in Palestine today, and its pods are still used as forage. Evidently the lad was securing some food by his labor, but he was close enough to the starvation level that he longed to get down among the swine and eat these dry pods. “No man gave unto him.” This was a great blessing which helped to bring him to his senses. The change from a self-respecting, honest man to a hobo is frequently made by the process of “something for nothing.” Suffering as the result of his misdeeds was the necessary prelude to his repentance.

Recollections and Reflections

“But when he came to himself.” This eloquent phrase implies that he had been out of his mind. He had fallen so desperately in love with the mad pleasures of the world that his better judgment had deserted him. He would not have behaved in such an outrageous manner if he had had all his faculties. When his nobler self began to assert itself, he began to think of the high estate from which he had fallen: his home, his father, his former blessed life, which he had scorned and trampled into the mire. He found the recollections of his youth inviting. He contrasted the abundance which the servants enjoyed at home with the starvation that faced him in this far country where he had anticipated such unending pleasure. “I perish here with hunger!” The emphasis is strong on here — this land of bright lights and dark shadows had promised so much and provided so little.

Repentance

“I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight” (Luke 15:18). Freedom of the will and the necessity for every person to accept the full responsibility for his own life together with frank confession of sin are underscored. It is to the young man’s credit that he did not try to blame his downfall on evil companions. Who had chosen these companions? Had he not come all the way to this far country for just such companionship? The responsibility was his own, and he did not seek to evade it. Sin fundamentally is disobedience to God, and in this sense all sin is against heaven. God is the great Giver of every good gift; and, when we waste His good gifts, our sin of ingratitude is first of all against Him. God is the great King of the universe, and our sin of disobedience is first against Him. God is the great Judge of the world, and our sins are first of all to be judged by Him The preposition here is eis, which ordinarily means into. but here it is translated against. If it were translated with tile primary meaning it would mean “unto heaven”: “crying unto heaven for punishment.”

Reformation The young man had rushed away into a far country to avoid his father’s presence, but his folly is manifest now, and he feels that none of the evil things he has done have really been hidden from his father. His father’s love and kindness were not limited by space. His resolution is entirely appropriate. He had left his father’s home: now he must return. He had scorned his father’s goodness; now he must ask for mercy. He had wasted his father’s substance; now he must undertake to make this good even by the most menial service. He had become a slave to sin and sullied the very name he wore; now he must rise out of the mire and prove himself a man. The supreme effort of shaking off the shackles of evil habits, lethargy, and despair is suggested by the decisive “I will arise.” He plans to make a full and frank confession to his father of his sinful life. What other people may say or do does not deter him; it is between his father and himself. He shows a clear appreciation of the real value of the inheritance he had scorned and of the depths to which he had fallen. He is not worthy to be called a son by his father; he will be happy to become a hired servant in his father’s house; it will be a promotion from his present degradation. The Father’s Welcome

“But while he was yet afar off, his father saw him, and was moved with compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him” (Luke 15:20). Up to this point the prodigal has been the leading actor in the drama, but from this point forward the father is the center of interest. The desires, motives, conduct, and experiences of the young man had engrossed the attention, but now the parable begins to parallel the first two parables in its revelation of the great love of God for lost humanity. The shepherd had risked unknown perils and endured unrecorded hardships in going forth into the wilds in search of his lost sheep. The woman who had lost the precious coin had labored and searched without ceasing. There is no word in this third parable of the father’s going into the far country in search of his lost son. Nor is there any mention of his seeking information about the son or sending word to him. The very conduct of Jesus which had given rise to the criticism of the Pharisees was that He “receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.” This is the heart of the gospel and is most strongly emphasized in the first two parables The explosion of the pent-up love and agonized yearning of the father during all this time, as he beheld the son afar off and rushed out to welcome him, reveals how great had been the desire of the father for the salvation of his son. The wording is unusual: “his father saw him”; in spite of the distance and the terrible change in his son’s appearance, the father recognized him. The verb is emphatic, “he kissed him tenderly.” The son had not as yet spoken; there is a language of the eyes which is not limited to romance. The fact that his son had returned in such shameful condition, the light in his eyes, the falling tears, and his entire demeanor needed no interpretation. The Father’s Love

Manuscripts differ as to whether the son spoke as he had planned and actually proposed that he be made a hired servant. It is contained in) B D U X (a combination which the a.s.v. almost always follows), but is omitted by practically all other manuscripts and most versions. Both the a.v. and the a.s.v. omit the statement “make me as one of thy hired servants. His father’s gracious love overwhelmed him, and he was overcome by his emotions and could go no further than confess his unworthiness. In the far country he had realized that his father loved him and was forgiving; he felt sure his father would receive him back home. But he saw now that he had not really understood the depth of his father’s suffering and great love. The suggestion that he be made a hired servant did not harmonize with such a loving reception as this.

It is not made clear whether the servants were present at this reunion. But they were at hand as the father commanded the ragged clothes of the son to be changed for “the best robe” (the finest in the house). Worn-out shoes or none at all must have excited attention and pity; shoes were to be supplied for his feet. The father addressed the servants rather than the son because his actions would express more decisively his overflowing joy and furnish the best answer to the son’s confession. As the son had made known his repentance before he had spoken a word, so the father made clear his forgiveness by his actions in recognizing the prodigal while he was yet a great way off and in rushing out to meet him, embracing him, and kissing him. Now these commands to the servants revealed how great was his joy and how complete his forgiveness.

Details

Attempting to identify the details of the gifts to the son as having hidden meaning would be a mistake. This is scenery of the parable which gives colorful vividness to the drama. The father makes plain that the son is restored to his former state of honor in the home. “He that humbleth himself shall be exalted.” Plummer lessens the force of the entire parable when he attempts to argue that “dead” and “lost” mean “dead to me” and “lost to me”; the son had gone away apparently forever and hence was practically dead to his father. It is manifest in the entire parable that the natural moral content of these fateful words is implied. The father represents God and the geographical separation of the father and son is nothing compared to the moral separation with its eternal implications, which is pictured by the conduct of the son. The Elder Brother At this point the elder brother advances to the center of the stage. He is the sort of sour individual who is able to put a chill on any occasion of rejoicing. He has a keen, personal interest in this unexpected turn of events. Presumably he would be the sole heir, with the permanent disappearance of his younger brother from the home. The first part of the parable has depicted an account which glorifies the course of Jesus in seeking and saving the lost. The latter part represents in its true light the exclusive claim to the favor of God and the entire churlish attitude of the Pharisees It is full of gentle appeals to the Pharisees to win them back to loving obedience to God. All the tenderness with which the father appeals to the elder son, reminding him that he also is his son and that all the gifts and blessings of the home are his, if he will accept them, is directed toward the Pharisees

Dancing

“Now his elder son was in the field; and as he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard music and dancing” (Luke 15:25). The two words music and dancing occur only here in the New Testament. The Greek word symphonias means, as does its English equivalent, a harmony of musical instruments. This ensemble was probably a band of players or singers, or both. These were probably flute players as is shown by Matthew 11:17 where “We piped unto you, and ye did not dance.” The verb for playing the flute is used, and the verb for dancing is orcheo from which our word orchestra comes. The dancing was rhythmical movement in groups, the men and the women dancing in separate groups. No mixed dancing was known in the ancient world and is only found today in the East where they have adopted western customs.

“And he called to him one of the servants, and inquired what these things might be” (Luke 15:26). We are not told whether the elder son had been at work in the field or was merely inspecting the farm. Up to this point there is no hint as to his character or attitude. His inquiry was perfectly natural; he did not understand the great commotion at the house and sought to learn the cause from the first servant he met. “Thy brother is come; and thy father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound” (Luke 15:27). Some suggest that the servant had only the literal meaning of the words safe and sound in mind, that the young man was still alive and in good health, back home after so many months in a far country. It seems more probable that he gave the deeper moral meaning to his words indicating the return of the son to a repentant change of life. The repentance of the prodigal would have been as evident to the servants as it was to the father, even if they had not been present when he made his humble confession of sin. The ringing words of the father to the servants would have spread quickly through the household: “dead, alive, lost, found.” The attitude of the son in repenting and the father in forgiving would have given the entire household deeper cause for rejoicing than the mere physical welfare of the lad. The servants reflected the joyous attitude of the father and repeated his words.

Anger

“But he was angry, and would not go in.” The real character of the elder son is now revealed. The selfish spirit that controlled him leaps forth from the narrative. The things which stir our wrath are as significant a revelation of character as those which bring us joy. The tenses of the Greek verbs are precise and significant: “He was enraged” (aorist, definite decisive action); and he also “continued to be unwilling to go in” (imperfect, continued action in past time). Jealousy, lack of love for his brother, false, selfish motives for serving his father, egotism, ingratitude, false pride in himself, overestimation of his own virtue and blindness to his sins — the very things which cursed the Pharisees — are accurately depicted in the elder brother. His rage at his brother’s return reveals all this like a flashlight photograph taken when he was off guard and his mask of hypocrisy had fallen.

Hypocrisy

“Lo, these many years do I serve thee, and I never transgressed a commandment of thine; and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends; but when this thy son came, who hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou killedst for him the fatted calf” (Luke 15:29, Luke 15:30). This flood of accusations against both his brother and his father reach a climax in his absolute refusal to pronounce the word brother. Observe the searing sarcasm of this thy son — “this low creature whom I refuse to recognize, even though you still consider him your son. His accusations are full of untruths. He declared his own absolute obedience to his father in the very moment he was flagrantly disobedient. He asserted his absolute perfection when his imperfections were appearing at their worst. It is not possible to determine how far he was self-deceived and how much he was deliberately lying. Who but God can judge the shades of hypocrisy? When he charged his father with favoritism and injustice, he revealed ingratitude as the great sin of his own life. When he attempted to describe in detail the most heinous sins of the younger son, we do not know how much he knew and how much he was surmising. Drinking, gambling, and sexual crimes abound among those who waste their substance in riotous living. The prodigal could probably have scattered more money to the four winds faster at gambling than any other excess. The elder brother attempted to sum up in one single charge the prodigal’s downfall of character: harlots. This word is thrown in sharp contrast with my friends. These were doubtless very respectable, but the elder son may have been unconsciously uncovering his own evil thoughts and intents showing that this is what he would have done if once he could have left his father and gone to the far country.

Part of the marvelous skill of the parable is its brevity. It does not enter into lurid details of the prodigal’s sinful life; the boy has returned home repentant; therefore, the elder brother should forgive him and give him a fair chance to live a new life. The bitterness of the elder brother came not so much from his hatred of sin as from his jealousy and hatred of his brother. An interesting variation in interpretation is seen in the alternate emphasis: “Thou never gavest me a kid,” or “Thou never gavest me a kid [not even a kid].” The elder son referred to his younger brother with scorn that was scorching, and he talked to his father with insolence as if a master were addressing a slave. The ingratitude, blindness, and scorn for his birthright which the prodigal had shown at the beginning was now repeated in the conduct and words of the elder son. Here is the heart of the parable; all men are sinners — some of the publican type; some, the Pharisaical; many, with a modicum of both.

Love Divine

Crowning this unveiling of the sinfulness of man is the unsearchable love of God so patient, so unfailing, so completely past our understanding. How patient and loving the father was with both his unworthy sons! We are not told all he had said to the younger son, trying to dissuade him from his determination to go away into a far country. From what he says to the elder son, we can readily fill in the gap. Hear his gentle rebuke of the older son: “Son, thou art ever with me In his act of rebellion the elder son had sacrificed his right to that title son, but the father had infinite patience. The father offered two replies: (1) The reproach of his having failed to reward the elder son is met with the reminder that the son is blind to the blessings he had received, because they had been so abundant and so constant. (2) The reproach of unfitting reward of the vices of the prodigal is answered by the declaration that this was not a reward to a son for wicked living, but a joyous reception to him, since he had changed his life and returned repentant to begin anew.

Dramatic Close

One of the most remarkable things about this greatest of parables is the abrupt manner in which it ends and leaves the readers in suspense. What happened further? Did the elder son also repent, ask forgiveness of his father for all his selfish, sinful attitude and for these harsh words, and then go in to throw his arms about his younger brother in joyous welcome and pledge of good fellowship for the future? Did the younger brother now prove true to the new life he had vowed? Jesus had just been warning the multitudes that they must count the cost and give daily battle to the devil, if they would prove true. Here is further challenge. His most direct appeal is to the Pharisees Their carping criticism of His campaigning among the publicans had brought forth the parable. The close is deeply moving: “Son, thou art ever with me, and all that is mine is thine,” if they will but repent of their exclusive, hypocritical, unforgiving attitude. With such a close Jesus offers the invitation hymn to the Pharisees Will they give heed and repent? Lost and found, and dead and alive are the dramatic words of the close. The younger son was dead, but he came to realize it and returned to life. The older son is dead and does not know it. Will he “come to himself” in time for eternal life?