Luke 15:11-32, The Parable of the Two Lost Sons

The Parable of the Two Lost Sons

 ¹¹ Jesus continued: “There was a man who had two sons. ¹² The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate.’ So he divided his property between them.

 ¹³ “Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had, set off for a distant country and there squandered his wealth in wild living. ¹⁴ After he had spent everything, there was a severe famine in that whole country, and he began to be in need. ¹⁵ So he went and hired himself out to a citizen of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed pigs. ¹⁶ He longed to fill his stomach with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything.

 ¹⁷ “When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! ¹⁸ I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. ¹⁹ I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired men.’ ²⁰ So he got up and went to his father.
      “But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him.

 ²¹ “The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’

 ²² “But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. ²³ Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. ²⁴ For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate.

 ²⁵ “Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing. ²⁶ So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on. ²⁷ ‘Your brother has come,’ he replied, ‘and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.’

 ²⁸ “The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him. ²⁹ But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. ³⁰ But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’

 ³¹ ” ‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. ³² But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ “

Structure

A  There was a man who had two sons

1 and the younger of them said to his father, “Father, give me the share of property that falls to me.” And he divided his living between them.

2 Not many days later the younger son sold all he had, journeyed into a far country and wasted his property in extravagant living.

3 And when he had spent everything a great famine arose in that country and he began to be in want.

4 So he went and joined himself to one of the citizens of that country and he sent him to his fields to feed

5 And he would gladly have eaten the pods which the pigs ate and no one gave him anything.

6 But when he came to himself he said, “How many of my father’s servants have bread to spare but I perish here with hunger.

6’  “I will arise and go to my father and say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you and am no more worthy to be called your son.  Make me a servant.

5’  And he arose and came to his father.  And while he was at a great distance his father saw him and had compassion and ran and embraced him and kissed him.

4’  And the son said to the father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you and am no more worthy to be called your son.”

3’  And the father said to the servants, “Bring the best robe and put it on him and put ring on his hands and shoes on his feet.

2’  And bring the fatted calf and kill it and let us eat and make merry.

1’  for this my son was dead and is alive, he was lost and is found.”  And they began to make merry.

B  Now the elder son was in the fields

1 and as he came and drew near to the house he heard music and dancing and he called on of the boys and asked what this meant.

2 And he said to him, “Your brother has come and your father has killed the fatted calf because he received him with peace.”

3 But he was angry and refused to go in, so his father came out and was entreating him.

4 But he answered his father, “Lo these many years I have served you and I have never disobeyed your commandments, yet you never gave me a kid to make merry with my friends.

4’  But when this son of yours came, who has devoured your living with harlots, you killed for the fatted calf.”

3’  And he said to him, “Beloved son, you are always with me and all that is mine is yours.

2’  It was fitting to make merry and be glad, for this your brother was dead and is alive, he was lost and is found.”

[no 1’]

 

Exposition

• The younger son is wishing for his father’s death in his request for his portion, and if a son ever asked his father this he would most likely beat him. There is no law or custom among the Jews or Arabs that entitles a son to a share of the father’s wealth while the father is still alive.  During the intertestamental period, the Mishna notes a provision for willing over of one’s inheritance before death, but not at the insistence of a younger son.  Even so, the Talmud reads, “Our Rabbis taught: three cry and are not answered, he who has money and lends it without witnesses, he who acquires a master, and he who transfers his property to his children in his lifetime.”  A father might do this for the purpose of determining what his sons would have after him and prevent disputes, but this would never happen at the demand of a son while his father was in good health.
• Dividing the inheritance does not by itself give one the right to dispose of his share. This son pressured his father into giving him the right of disposition immediately.  Otherwise the father would have the right to live off the proceeds of the inheritance as long as he is alive.  The son had no right to put his father in this jeopardy.  This is a profound break of relationship between the father and son.  The son is lost.
• More remarkable is that the father grants the request. The father in this culture would be expected to explode in anger and discipline the boy.  He would certainly not have granted it without getting some guarantee of provision till his death.  It would have been expected in the village, once the son sold his inheritance to foreigners, that the father or the village perform qesasah, bringing of barrels full of parched corn and nuts and breaking them open in the presence of the children, who would proclaim, “So and so is cut off from his inheritance” (selling his land to a Gentile).  When the prodigal son returns and the village has found out about how he disposed of the inheritance, community solidarity will require a radical response of judgment.
• The older son also receives his share of the inheritance. He should have responded in two ways: first, he should have loudly refused to accept his share (but his silence suggests that his relationship with his father is not as it should be), and second, he should have taken the traditional role of the reconciler between his father and younger brother.  Again, his silence means refusal.  Even if he hated his brother, the older son should have gone through the motions of reconciliation, but he doesn’t.
• The younger brother cashes in and leaves not many days later. The hatred of the community has mounted against him.  He is being greeted with horror, amazement and rejection at every turn in his village.  He can’t take it any longer.
• The prodigal is accused of being wasteful, not immoral. But he is not, therefore, prepared for the famine.  There were at least 10 such famines from 169 B.C. to A.D. 70, so people would have vivid experience of them.  Being a Jew in a far country made life even more difficult, with no one to fall back on among his community.  He glues himself to a citizen of the country, who apparently, in the politeness of the Middle Easter way, gave the unwanted man a job no one with self-respect would take.  But the man is desperate and takes it.  Such a situation would not be unlike why some had become tax-collectors.  By taking this job the man would likely have to renounce the regular practice of his religion because he couldn’t observe Sabbath and would be in contact with unclean animals.
• The pods he longs to eat were most likely the thorny carob, whose berries are harsh and not eaten except in direst emergencies. Regardless of how much he ate, he was not full.  That no one was giving to him likely means no one was feeding him regularly.  It was custom for the owner of the pigs to give the less desirable portions to the help upon slaying the pig, but he may have been unable to eat pig despite his hunger.
• His contemplated forgiveness is not remorse for his sins but the realization that he has no other choice. He says he will say, “I have sinned against heaven and you and am no longer worthy to be called your son.”  But that his primary goal is to save face is found in his anticipated proposal to be a hired servant.
• In the 1^st century there were “bondsmen” who were slaves that were a part of the estate and almost a part of the family, there were “slaves” who were subordinates to the bondsmen, and there were “hired servants” who were outsiders that did not belong to the estate, in fact had no personal interests in the affairs of their temporary masters. They were casual laborers employed only when required.  They were free men.  If this young man became a hired servant, he might be able to pay back what he had lost and, in his mind, fulfill his moral responsibilities to his father.  His social status will not be inferior to his father or brother, and he can maintain his pride and independence.  He wants to save himself.  He does not need grace.  The way he plans to phrase it to his father is a command, “Make me one of your hired servants.”  As such he will not be eating his brother’s bread.  Living at home would require reconciliation with his brother, but this arrangement will make reconciliation unnecessary.  Status in the village will be harder to achieve.  He will likely experience the qesasah, his entry into the village humiliating and ruthless.  There is no real solution for this.  He will have to live with the mockery and bitter humiliation.
• In the rabbis the idea that repentance is a work that man does prior to God’s acceptance of him frequent. One midrash reads, “Three things can cancel evil decrees; namely, prayer, almsgiving and repentance.”  And again, “If Israel says, ‘We are poor, we have no offering to make,’ God replies, ‘I need only words.’  If they say, ‘We know nothing’ [for by words the Midrash means the words of the Law], God says, ‘Then weep and pray before me, and I will accept your prayer.’”  A man was expected to make reparations before he could repent.  The prodigal is working on this.
• The Oriental farmer and landowner lives in his village. He likely expects his son to fail and if he makes it back will do so as a beggar.  He knows how the village will treat his son upon arrival and no doubt has been scolded for giving his son the inheritance to begin with.  As soon as the prodigal reaches the edge of the village and is identified a crowd will gather, taunt songs will begin, and other verbal abuse and possibly physical abuse will ensue.  So, he watches for his son.  When he sees him, he begins running to him.  An Oriental man of means never runs, ever.  To do so is humiliating.  But he had compassion on his son and sought to protect him from the gauntlet.  He runs the gauntlet for him.  He makes his reconciliation with his son public at the edge of the village.
• The son does not need a speech from his father. “The father substitutes kisses for words and replaces assertion with expression and eyes speak for the tongue.” (Sa’id).  The kiss prevents the son from kissing his hand or feet, and is a sign of reconciliation and forgiveness.  The son only gives part of his speech because he recognizes this.  He has been offered total forgiveness by grace apart from any works and genuine repentance has overwhelmed him.  He has been shattered by his father’s demonstration of love in humiliation.  The point is not his lost money, but rather the broken relationship he cannot heal.  Now he realizes that any new relationship must be a pure gift from his father.  To offer at this point to be a hired servant in order to compensate his father would be an insult.
• The father turns to his servants, who have followed him in typical Oriental style, and tells them to dress his son, assuring proper respect from the servants, who look to the master to know how to treat the son. The best robe is undoubtedly the father’s robe.  The Oriental listener would assume this.  The ring is likely the signet ring, which means he is trusted in a remarkable way.  The shoes are the sign of his being a free man in the house, not a servant.  Killing the fatted calf, rather than a goat or sheep, means that most, if not all the village, will be invited and present that evening for a meal, because the entire animal would spoil in a few hours if not eaten.  The father’s joy must be shared on all sides and the community must know how the father expects them to treat his son.

 

Theology

For Palestinian listeners the father in this parable would naturally be a symbol of God.  The father comes down out of the house and in a dramatic act demonstrates unexpected love publicly in humiliation.  Jesus intended his listeners to see in this act a dramatic representation of his welcome of sinners.  At least a part of the meaning of the incarnation and the atonement are present in this vivid demonstration of unexpected love.