The third parable (Luke 15:11-32) has three characters: the Father, the older son, and the younger son. Many have focused almost exclusively on the younger son, whom is called "the prodigal." In light of the historical context and the larger textual context of the flow of the gospel, attention should be given to both sons with an emphasis on the difference between the attitude of the Father versus the older son. The parable itself starts with these words in verse 11:
A certain man had two sons.
What everyone needs to understand is that both sons hated their Father, not just the younger son, which means that the two sons both did not love their Father. The Father in the story is God the Father.
To start, let's be clear that this is about the relationship of God to human beings. In one sense, God is Father of all (1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6), not in a saving sense, but in the sense that God cares for all humanity and provides for every man. This is not the "universal Fatherhood of man and brotherhood of men," but it is God as the source of all blessing for both the evil and the good. The goodness of God leads to repentance (Romans 2:4).
With the Father in the story being God the Father, someone might rightly ask, who could hate God the Father? What did God the Father do or not do in order to deserve this hate? Exposed to a psychiatrist, there would be something to blame God the Father. The son hates the Father because of something the Father did, the son being a victim of some sort of abuse to justify his hatred. No one should think that. It really is all on either of the two sons. The Father lays down His law and it could be thought to be controlling. God wanted Israel in the land after Egypt and after Babylon and both times, His children wanted to stay, thinking their Father was toxic.
The profligate lifestyle of the younger son should be taken as a metaphor for spiritual prodigality. He's turned away from his Father to his own sinful ways. Even though it is about God's relationship to men, there is other truth to apply about the nature of the relationship of fathers and sons. This parallel is seen repeated again and again throughout scripture, and it can tell us something about the relationship between sons and fathers.
With the Father in the story being God the Father, someone might rightly ask, who could hate God the Father? What did God the Father do or not do in order to deserve this hate? Exposed to a psychiatrist, there would be something to blame God the Father. The son hates the Father because of something the Father did, the son being a victim of some sort of abuse to justify his hatred. No one should think that. It really is all on either of the two sons. The Father lays down His law and it could be thought to be controlling. God wanted Israel in the land after Egypt and after Babylon and both times, His children wanted to stay, thinking their Father was toxic.
The profligate lifestyle of the younger son should be taken as a metaphor for spiritual prodigality. He's turned away from his Father to his own sinful ways. Even though it is about God's relationship to men, there is other truth to apply about the nature of the relationship of fathers and sons. This parallel is seen repeated again and again throughout scripture, and it can tell us something about the relationship between sons and fathers.
The Father
Let us do a brief character study on the three members of the story. Jesus shows the Father cares for both his sons in how he has treated them. He had an inheritance set apart for both of them, working to support them both (v. 12). He treated his sons much better than servants (v. 17). He wanted to give his sons great things, even though they didn't deserve what he gave them (vv. 22-23). He wanted to be with his sons (vv. 20, 24). He was very concerned about the well-being of his sons (v. 24). He intreated his sons when they confronted him and treated him in an angry way (v. 28). He was willing to give all he had to his sons (v. 31). He was glad for his sons' well being (v. 32).
The emphasis on the Father is provision and support. He provides what his sons need to give them the best opportunity to succeed. He is good in that way. This is not the sentimental Fatherhood of high fives and "yo, dude." When the younger son thought back to the goodness of his Father, he thought about the provision of his Father, all that His Father provided. Did your father provide? Was there food on the table, the security of a place to live, and loving restrictions like there are over 600 in the Old Testament and 1000 in the New? It's obvious both sons wanted more from their Father, that he was falling short in each of their evaluation. It is also to clear that reconciliation to the Father fell on the son recognizing the goodness of his Father, which was found in the provision and supply given.
The Younger Son
The younger son wanted to get out from under the authority of his Father (vv. 12-13). He was especially tempted by the apparent freedom he would have by running away. He wanted more than what he was getting. He was discontent and covetous. He immediately turns to riotous living, which is the idea of "prodigal." "Riotous" corresponds to "prodigal." The root word is found in only three other places.
Titus 1:6, If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
1 Peter 4:4, Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you:
Ephesians 5:18, And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
With the latter of this, the actual riot is found in the physical item, the wine. Wine with which someone can become drunk, alcoholic wine, has in it in the way of alcohol, the actual riot, translated "excess" in the King James Version.
The son wanted more because he perceived the Father to be too controlling. He's not allowing enough freedom. One psychologist writes:
Many fathers are genuinely surprised to discover their children hate them. They worked hard to pay the bills, bought the essentials, provided gifts, and paid tuition, and yet, after all their effort and willing contributions, their young adult hates them.
Many sons want more than support, provision, and loving guidance and restriction. They are looking for a kind of approval that won't be given by a righteous Father. He rejects unscriptural attitudes and actions.
God the Father has standards found in His law. If a son sees those laws as good, like scripture says about God's law, then he will see them as helpful. He won't see them as imposing freedom, but protection. Closely related to the impeding standards in the home is the discipline to enforce the standards. Biblical spanking, which is called chastisement when God the Father does it (Hebrews 12:3-12), is often called abuse by the one who chafes under authority and refuses to see the goodness he is and was receiving.
The younger son turns back to the Father and returns home when he understands how good he had it. The Father does nothing in the story, except in the nature of conviction that the younger son experiences, which could be seen as the work of the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of the Father. It could be the conscience. This is not on the Father but on the son to come to his senses. The Father has been and done good and it takes true acknowledgement of that. The rebellion will remain as long as the son keep thinking he was ripped off. That's a lie he will embrace to justify his lifestyle. This is what is seen in 1 Peter 4:4.
In the text of 1 Peter 4:4, the prodigal speaks of evil of the ones that run not with them. Those who will not approve of their lifestyle even by mere participation are treated in an evil way. The next verse says they "shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead." They speak evil of you, but they won't be giving an account to you, but unto God. A psychologist writes about children who hate their fathers:
Sooner or later, they will demand the freedom to be themselves. If they resent the restrictions you placed on them year after year—refusing to allow them to make their own decisions, pursue their interests, and have the power to reject the sports or school subjects they had no interest in but you insisted they pursue—don't be surprised if they hate you.
The implication of Luke 15 is that the father restricted his son. His son wanted his way and so with disrespect of his Father, he took off. An indication of repentance was that he came back to the Father, volunteering to be one of the slaves. He put the relationship to the Father ahead of his own self-interest. Sometimes the self-interest is the acceptance of the world, where the son puts that acceptance ahead of the approval of the Father. This is loving the world and not having the love of the Father in you (1 John 2:15-17).
The Older Son
The Father is obviously the central character of Jesus' story, but the spotlight is on the older son. He's the audience of the story, representing the Pharisees. He not only hates the Father, but also his younger brother. Love is not envious (1 Corinthians 13:4) and he is envious of the Father's treatment of his younger brother after he repents and returns (Luke 15:29). The older son not only wants something he doesn't think he's getting from his Father, but he doesn't want the younger son to receive approval. Those who receive his approval because of their right belief and practice, they also do not love. He can't be happy about the approval others receive, because it represents the approval he perceives he does not receive (verses 29-32).
The older son stays home in body, but in spirit he's on the road like his brother was. He wonders why he couldn't have a fatted calf to slaughter and barbecue with his friends (v. 29). He reminds me of Cain when God disrespected his offering in Genesis 4. He became angry and killed his brother Abel. He also reminds me of Saul when the people of Israel cried out that Saul had slain his thousands but David his ten thousands (1 Samuel 18:7). Saul tried then to kill David out of that jealousy. Jesus said that when someone won't reconcile, he's as good as committed murder against that person in his heart and that he hates that person (Matthew 5:21-26).
A pivotal problem of the older son is his false view of himself. He doesn't see himself as a sinner. Like the rich young ruler, he hasn't "transgressed. . . anytime thy commandment" (v. 29). Surely he broke some of his Father's commandments. Even if not, he was betraying his violation of the spirit of the command, because he wasn't keeping the commandments with the right attitude. Some have called this "keeping your head down." They keep the commandments, but they don't like keeping them. Surely the younger son didn't like keeping them either because of his own previous wrong view of his Father, before repentance.
1 John 5:3 talks about the attitude of the true believer, and the keeping of God's commandments are not grievous or burdensome, because he loves God. Why should anyone love God, when God hasn't given them everything that they want? They should love God because God commands it. They should love God because it is the truth. They should love God out of recognition for the thousands of things that God has done. Not recognizing those good things is being unthankful, like unbelievers are characterized in Romans 1:21.
Instead of staying and keeping his head down, the older son should have concentrated on all the good things. Colossians 3:1 calls this setting one's affections on things above. This keeps someone from turning to his own ways. It's not on the Father to do more things, but for the son to recognize what He has done.
Instead of staying and keeping his head down, the older son should have concentrated on all the good things. Colossians 3:1 calls this setting one's affections on things above. This keeps someone from turning to his own ways. It's not on the Father to do more things, but for the son to recognize what He has done.
The older son doesn't feel loved by his Father, because his Father isn't giving him what he thinks he warrants. This is worshiping the creature rather than the Creator. He isn't denying self. Society today portrays Fatherhood itself as a social construct.
Sons and Fathers
To the world, Fathers have that authority based only on the domination of men. Modern sons buy into this idea. Fathers don't have authority. They must earn it. This is role reversal, because the father earns his authority, rather than divinely possessing it, by submitting to the son. The father exists like a goodymeister to accede to the wishes of those he "serves" through "servant leadership," which is most often an obvious cover today for role reversal. I call this "renting the jumper."
Churches have also bought into the expectations of modern sons. They pander to their modern sensibilities with the stress on "unconditional love." They agree the son has been abused.
When the younger son left, he was separate from the father. The love of the father was at the most found in his turning his own son over to Satan, like 1 Corinthians 5:5, that "his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." The Father doesn't want that, but that's the best choice in the circumstance. That is actually the Father continuing to love. He's not accepting the son's behavior, like these churches, who welcome it in, not delivering these sons to Satan, but rewarding them as recipients of faux abounding grace.
Luke 15 tells the story of a good Father and two bad sons, who both did not love their Father. The two sons mirror each other. Both blame it on their Father. One son returned and loved his Father, providing the example of a way back for a son. The Father of the story gives the model for a father. He awaits with love the repentant son's return.
No comments:
Post a Comment