The Parable of the Lost Sons
Luke 15: 11-32
Introduction – Going to Cyprus for an extended stay of 3 months when I was 3yrs old back in 1963, I experienced village life that plunged me into a context that in some ways probably resembled something of the village setting of the parable of the Prodigal Son. The included the family context, the community context, the place of honour and shame and cultural practices.
Context of the parable - the original audience; one of a series of 3 parables; liet wort (repeated words indicating significance) - lost, found; the main characters in the narrative of the parable.
The following material of this message is from Kenneth Bailey’s book, The Cross and the Prodigal, (IVP 2005). The major point divisions are mine.
This message is divided into the following:
1. Death Wish & Division Lk 15:11-12
2. Departure, Depravity & Determination Lk 15:13-19
3. Deliverance & Declaration Lk 15:20-24
4. Defiance & Discretion Lk 15: 25-32
1. Death Wish & Division Lk 15:11-12
The Younger Son:
i. The request was mutiny/rebellion – impatient for his father to die
ii. Driven by self-centred pride
iii. A relationship is broken - not a law Deut 21:17 – the father’s heart broken
iv. Doesn’t care how much others in the family will suffer
v. He is ungrateful
vi. There is no trust
vii. He demands privilege without responsibility-wants substance not inheritance
viii. Cuts himself off from his roots & breaks fellowship with his father
ix. Refuse to share in partnership with the father
x. He is totally responsible
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 42-44)
The Older Son:
i. He knows the entire story
ii. He refuses to be mediator
iii. Silent refusal –a selfishness
iv. The departure he is still silent
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 44-46)
The Father:
i. Normal response – refusal & punishment
ii. He grants freedom even to turn away from him – God grants us freedom even to reject his love
iii. He does not severe the relationship with his son – the son breaks it
iv. This image of God is not patriarchal – this is the model of God
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 47)
We see the from the parable at the outset each reveal their own character –
We know the Younger Son by what he asks
We know the Father by what He does
We know the Older Son by what he does not do
2. Departure, Depravity and Determination Lk 15:13-19
Departure
V13. A speedy departure –
Liquidates the assets quickly – ‘got together all he had’ in the Gk means ‘turned into cash’ (synagagon panta).
‘set off for a distant country’ Gk apedemensen means he travelled away from his own people – to the Gentiles.
‘squandered his wealth’ dieskorpisen literally scattered
Extravagant living – spendthrift
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 52-54)
Depravity
V14 ‘spent’ is the Gk word for squander In the midst of deep trouble the young man will not return. He becomes his own worst enemy. Return meant acknowledging a host of things: immaturity, irresponsibility, dependence on others, thought of others, humiliation and more.
V15 He clung himself to a wealthy citizen the Gk word ‘joined’ is the word ‘glued’. This would have been the most humiliating situation. The citizen in all probability didn’t want this ‘hanger-on’. And so he gives the young man the task of ‘feeding the pigs’. This adds to the descent of the young man. His social identity, his personal identity and his spiritual identity all plummet. Yet the young man will allow this rather than turning back home.
V16 The young man would ‘desired’ Greek – ‘lusted – craving’ - a strong term. Not only did he work with pigs he fell to such an extent he wished to be a pig. Sin starts with association and leads to assimilation. The web of sin is strong and sticky – we will allow ourselves to hold onto what holds us. It is a path of bondage, of captivity and what we once despise we eventually become. His despair reached a new depth.
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 54-58)
Determination
VV17-19. There was one major obstacle in the way of a simple return home. The fact that the young man had lost his wealth meant that he would be subject to the Kezazah ceremony of the village. This ceremony literally meant ‘cutting off’ – if a member of the community lost their wealth amongst the Gentiles a clay pot was broken publicly in front of them with the statement ‘so-and-so is cut off from his people’. Restoration to his family and village was only possible if he could pay back the money he had lost.
When we read ‘he came to himself’ some interpret this as the young man repenting. But the expression does not contain this aspect. The young man had reached a point of despair that he realised he could do better. He devised a scheme. He came up with a humble speech and a solution. ‘Make me like one of your hired men’. The young man sees the problem being the lost money not the broken relationship. If he was a hired servant he would pay back the debt and will eventually become a free agent again.
The motivation for his determination is his hunger – he wants to eat but he will return home and still remain in control.
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 58-62)
3. Deliverance and Declaration Lk 15:20-24
Deliverance
Distance – the father sees his young son – he is on the lookout and on sight of his son the Father is filled with COMPASSION. This is the immediate response. His hurt was not driving his reaction. This is the heart of our God! God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – have delivered us from our sin by their overwhelming compassion.
The father runs like an athlete – this is powerful since it was contrary to custom for a man over 40 to run – it was undignified, especially for an important man such as this wealthy landowner. The act itself would require the father hitching up his robe exposing his legs – this adds to the shame. The father was shaming himself publicly for the sake of delivering his son from shame and the ceremony of Kezazah. The humiliation of the father leaving the house is also breaking custom and was inappropriate. But it is a picture of the Father sending the Christ as our deliver. The incarnation was an act of supreme humiliation. Returning to the parable – the father takes on the shame and humiliation belonging to the young son. The costly demonstration of unexpected love in the village street demonstrates a part of the meaning of the cross. This is costly love!
It doesn’t stop there. The Father embraced him and kissed him. The Greek means the father kissed tenderly or kept on kissing – he showered him with kisses. This was also a break with dignified appropriateness. But see how grant the joy is!!
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 66-70)
Declaration
How will the young son respond?
V 21 Bewildered by his Father’s love the young son cuts short his rehearsed supply. He drops off wanting to remain in control and submits himself to the extravagant love of his father – the costly love of his father. He puts himself completely at the mercy of the father. The son’s revised declaration is one of true repentance. It is at this point that real deliverance comes. The father does not interrupt the son. His declaration is intentional changed. The young son is flooded with awareness that his real sin is not the loss of money but the wounded heart of the father. His father’s suffering overwhelms him.
How does the father respond?
V22-24 The father notes the young son’s response. And immediately adds to his mercy and grace blessing. The relationship is restored because the father has his son’s heart.
i. The servant is ordered to get the best robe – that is the father’s best robe. The young son is to be honoured and the rightful son of the house. This is a sign of full restoration!
ii. The ring is to be placed on the son’s hand. This was the signet ring of the house.
iii. Shoes on his feet – another symbol of full restoration. Sons wore shoes, slave went barefoot.
iv. Prepare the fatted calf – this was the prime animal used for the most special occasion – it was grain fed.
All that the father declares is a public declaration of the young son’s total restoration. Each item covers both a household and community dimension to the complete restoration of the son. There will be no Kezazah for the young man – the father has taken decisive action that complete prevents this occurrence. Only the father is able to restore the son and restoration is through grace alone.
There is now joy, rejoicing, feasting – a party!! The father’s declaration of restoration is concluded with a declaration of regeneration:
FOR THIS MY SON WAS DEAD, AND IS NOW ALIVE AGAIN; HE WAS LOST, AND NOW IS FOUND
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 70-74)
4. Defiance and Discretion Lk 15:25-32
V25 The elder son now becomes the focus. The Gk word for ‘elder’ son is presbyteros - this word was generally used in connection with the Scribes. There is no mistaking who this son is representing. He notices that there is celebration.
V26 The young boy he questions was most likely one of the villagers who would hang outside the house to enjoy such an important event in the life of the village.
V27 The eldest son finds out that: his brother has arrived; the father has killed the fatted calf and has received the son with peace. The last – received with peace is a clear indication of public reconciliation.
Defiance
V28 The older son responds with both anger and defiance. He refused to go in. This was also an act of disrespect. When the head of the family gave a feast he would sit with the guest and the eldest son would act as head waiter. This was an act of honouring the guests. The eldest son was infuriated – his father had violated village tradition in reinstating the youngest son through costly grace. To some grace is not amazing but infuriating.
Tradition required that any male member of the household must come and shake the hands of the guests. Failure to do so – to meet this courtesy was a personal insult to both the guests and the host – the father. The older son knows his action is an intentional public insult to his father.
The father has the right to be furious with the older son. News of the son’s refusal would have spread to all the guests and those outside. This was public rebellion. The father had the right to respond by punishing his son. In one sense the oldest son’s sin is greater than the younger. The younger’s act was done in private. The elder son makes it a public act of defying the father’s authority.
For a second time the father responds in the most incredible way. Once again the father demonstrates a willingness to endure shame and self-emptying love in order to reconcile.
‘The father came out and entreated him.’ The father deliberately left the guests, humiliating himself before all, and went out to try and reconcile his son.
The father loves both sons indiscriminately. He gives of himself to both despite their actions.
He entreats not punishes. There are 7 different words for ‘call’ the one used here is to appeal to – to try to reconcile – para – kaleo.
V29-30 The older son condemns himself by his own words:
i. He refuses to participate in reconciling his brother to the village.
ii. He rebels against his father in his speech by omitting to honour him by not giving him his title of ‘father’ – I have never disobeyed you – in letter only but not in heart. He is rude and rebellious here at this moment.
iii. He has broken relationship with the father. He here breaks his father’s heart.
iv. He accuses his father of favouritism.
v. He reads himself out of the family.
vi. He refuses partnership with his father.
vii. He despises his brother. Your son – he has disowned what/who his father has owned.
viii. His view of his relationship with his father is that of master and servant. I have served you. A servant obeys law a son responds to love – his choice is law and his concern is reward.
ix. The older son needs to be forgiven by his younger brother and the father. He thinks they need to apologize to him whereas he needs their forgiveness.
x. He falsifies the value of the banquet – the joy of his father - a celebration of peace – you killed for him the fatten calf.
xi. He is consumed with envy, pride, bitterness, sarcasm, anger, resentment, self-centredness, hate, stinginess, self-satisfaction, self-righteousness and self-deception.
Discretion
V31-32
If the father was more like a typical Middle Eastern patriarch he would have reprimanded his son before all. But he overlooks the bitterness. There is no judgement, no criticism and no rejection.
He opens his reply with a love entreaty ‘Son’ here is the word teknon and not uios a term of great endearment and affection. Gently he corrects one point – a key point ‘your brother’. The rest of the speech is a defence of joy.
We must remember that this story brings us back to Jesus’ explanation to why he eats with sinners.
(See Bailey, The Cross and the Prodigal, 78-89).
Conclusion
This parable is full of extraordinary lessons. It contains a three-fold message: 1. The need to return to God and repent of rebellion – both in attitude of heart and in action. 2. A warning against making ourselves the judge of God and thereby and sitting in self righteous rebellion (thinking we know better than God) 3. Marvel in the Grace, Mercy and Love of God, who actively has brought about reconciliation in and through the person and work of Jesus Christ. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit all participate in restoring the repentant rebel to relationship. We have a choice to make – do we seek the embrace of a ready Father through repentance and reconciliation; or do we reject His relationship through pride and rebellion?
