Verse 27: The slave tells the older son that his brother has come back and the father received him with “peace.”
This word can mean “in good health” but it also translates the Hebrew word shalom, which indicates reconciliation also. “He received him” is a reminder of the Pharisees' objection to Jesus' behavior in Luke 15:2. The banquet is really a celebration of the success of the father's efforts at reconciling his son.
Verses 29-30: By contrast, the older son treats the banquet as a celebration of the prodigal, not the father. We see in reality a type of the communion service in which it is Jesus who is celebrated, not we sinners.
Verse 28 The older son is mad that the reconciliation has taken place without the prodigal paying for his sins. That is why he actually takes the step of publicly breaking off his relationship with his father, which he was doing by refusing to participate in his father's banquet. Note that father went out to meet the older son as he had done with the younger one. Bruner says, “Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound, that saves a self-righteous prig like me.”
Craddock points out that in our competitive society we always feel that there needs to be a winner and a loser. We find it difficult not to be offended by God's grace toward another, especially if we have serious questions about that person's conduct and character. “We might not mind welcoming the prodigal son back in the family as long as he would wear sackcloth and ashes, but not for feasting and dancing.”
Verse 29: The older son doesn't call father, father; and compares himself to a slave. It also demonstrates his similarity with the younger son in that he expected something from his father instead of rejoicing that being in his father's presence was reward enough. Also note his repeated “I, me, and my” in this verse.
Verse 30: Look at the other pronouns. “This son of yours” betrays his attitude toward his brother just as the lawyer's refusal to say the word “Samaritan” in the Good Samaritan Parable showed his true attitude.
Verses 31-32: In addition to ignoring the insult, the father humiliates himself again by trying to woo his older son back. The father pointedly calls the younger son “your brother.”
He reminds the older son that his brother has no more inheritance left, unlike himself, and would
remain dependent on him or others when the father died. Even though we may have been forgiven for
our sins, we must still live out the consequences of our actions for the rest of our lives. The father
reminds older son that they all are family and that the Father is still the one in charge, but does it in
gentleness. He does not argue with the son that he is mistaken or try to defend the younger son.
“The older son had not learned that family language is largely the language of love, forgiveness, and reconciliation, not that of moral obligation.” (Christopher A. Hall)
“If the older son accepts the love now offered to him, he will be obliged to treat the Prodigal with the same loving acceptance with which the father welcomed the pig herder. The older son will need to be “conformed to the image” of that compassionate father who comes to both kinds of sinners in the form of a suffering servant, offering undeserved, costly love. (Bailey)
By the way, if we are similarly bothered by the message in this story and the parable of the laborers in
the field, then we most likely identify with the older brother.
Let us turn next to the literary characteristics of this parable. In the first place, it is cleverly designed so
that it strictly follows the Rule of Stage Duality: only two characters or groups of characters are on the
stage at one time. Of the three major characters, each scene takes place between only two of them at a
time, and the two brothers never appear together, perhaps to demonstrate how estranged they are from
one another. Contrast it to this painting of this parable. The same thing happens in the Book of Ruth
where Naomi and Boaz are never together and in the David and Bathsheba story where Uriah is never
together with Bathsheba, which has obvious implications to the conclusion of the narrative.
While we are on the subject of the OT parallels, an interesting study is to compare and contrast the
story of Jacob and Esau's reconciliation found in Genesis with this parable. Kenneth Bailey has done
just that in his book.
The next thing to note about the structure is that it is divided into two parts: the first concerns the youngest son (vv. 1-24) while the rest is about the eldest son. The parallelism between these two halves is accentuated by the similar endings of each half. But what does happen at the end? Will the whole family now celebrate? We are not told what the older son decided to do, and the open-ended nature of this parable, which makes us ponder what we would have done in the same situation, is highlighted by the missing phrase at the end (see Figure 1). “Is he willing? We are not told. By this point the audience is on the stage and must decide for itself.” (Bailey) Interestingly, Bailey also sees this parable as consisting of a dual chiasm with a pointed missing final element at the end, but his divisions are totally different from those below, and Snodgrass calls them “forced and arbitrary.”
This literary technique turns out to be identical to that used in the Book of Jonah, which happens to
have exactly the same message as the parable: the fact that God shows his love toward all (see Figure
2).
Figure 1: Parable of the Prodigal Son
I. The Prodigal Son (15:12-22)
A. Father gives the son his inheritance (12)
B. Son leaves home and squanders his money (13-16)
C. Shares his thoughts about his situation (17-19)
B'. Returns home repentant (20a)
A'. Father reassures him regarding his place in the family (20b-22)
II. The Righteous Son (15:25-32)
A. Son hears about the feast when coming home (25-27)
B. Becomes angry and refuses to go in (28)
C. Shares his thoughts about his situation (29-30)
(B'. He repents and goes to the feast)
A'. Father reassures him regarding his place in the family (31)
Note that the similar center sections to each chiasm point to the similarity between the two sons and expose their heart issues.
Conclusions to the Parable
Prodigal Son: Conclusion (23-24)
1. “let us eat and celebrate” (23)
2. “my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found” (24a)
3. “and they began to celebrate” (24b)
Righteous Son: Conclusion (32)
1. “we had to celebrate and rejoice” (32a)
2. “your brother was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found” (32b)
(3. “and they all began to celebrate”)
Figure 2: The Structure of Jonah 4
1. Jonah's Attitude: Anger (4:1)
2. Jonah's rhetorical question to the LORD (4:2)
3. Dialogue (4:3-5a)
a. Jonah asks to die (4:3)
b. LORD's question: “Do you do well to be angry?” (4:4)
c. Jonah's reply: He leaves the city (4:5a)
4. Jonah in the shade (4:5b)
5. LORD grows the plant (4:6a)
6. Jonah's Attitude: Gladness (4:6b)
5'. LORD withers the plant (4:7)
4'. Jonah in the sun (4:8a)
3'. Dialogue (4:8b-9b)
a. Jonah asks to die (4:8b)
b. LORD's question: “Do you do well to be angry?” (4:9a)
c. Jonah's reply: “Yes” (4:9b)
2'. LORD's rhetorical question to Jonah (4:10-11)
1'. Jonah's Attitude: ?
Notice that God's behavior in the story of Jonah and the father's attitude in this parable are identical. He
shows equal compassion toward those outside and those within the fold and gives each of them time to
repent. The parable is not an attack on the Pharisees, and the ending “functions as an invitation for
them to change their attitude.” (Snodgrass) Jesus
is not saying that the older brother (Pharisees) has
no relationship with God, merely that he should not have a disdainful attitude toward repentant
sinners.
An alternative chiastic organization to this parable has been proposed by Welch which points to the father's love as the main point of the story. It illustrates Breck's contention that fresh insights can be gained from varying attempts to discern the overall structure of a passage.
A. One son takes his inheritance, scene between father and son. (vv. 11-12)
B. One son goes out; his conduct (vv. 13-16)
C. The well-being of the father's servants recalled (v. 17)
D. I will say, “I have sinned” (vv. 18-19)
E. Father is compassionate toward his son (v. 20)
D'. The son says, “I have sinned” (v. 21)
C'. Father gives instructions to the servants (vv. 22-24)
B'. One son refuses to go in; his conduct (vv. 25-30)
A'. One son promised his inheritance; scene between father and son (vv. 31-32)
Go back to verse 2: They had criticized Jesus for welcoming sinners and tax collectors and dining with
them just as the father in the story welcomed his son, who was also a sinner and worked for Gentiles
(just as the tax collectors did), and had a feast for him. Jesus effectively hands the situation back to the
Pharisees and says, “What will you do now?”
Similar teachings are found in Luke 5:31-32 and Luke 19:10.
An interesting Bible study could be made by comparing and contrasting this parable with the story of
the reunion between the estranged brothers Jacob and Esau found in Genesis 32-33.
Tertullian felt that this parable must never be applied to Christians. “Security in sin develops an
appetite for it.” Novatian felt that those who lapsed in times of persecution should never be admitted
back into the church. By contrast, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, and Gregory of Nazianzus were
appalled that anyone could deny forgiveness for those wishing to repent and rejoin the church. Gregory
pointed out that Novatian was very selective in which sins he felt couldn't be forgiven.
One final note regarding the way in which all three parables end: The sheep parable says that there is
more rejoicing in heaven over the one sinner who repents than over 99 righteous people while the coin
parable just says there is joy over the repentant sinner without comparing it to their attitude toward the
righteous ones. This possible contradiction is only resolved at the end of the final parable in which the
“righteous” person is asked to join in the rejoicing but also reminded of the constant love the father has
for him. The older brother has to wrestle with his feelings that the father is doing exactly what the
angels are said to do regarding the sheep parable – show some sort of preference for the sinner.
Snodgrass sees three main messages in this parable:
1. An emphasis on the actions of a loving God.
2. An invitation to celebrate the return of a sinner.
3. A defense of Jesus' association with sinners.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments