The Prodigal God Series: Introduction

Pastor Burcham’s Sermon

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Prodigal God. That’s not right. It’s the prodigal son, right? From the youngest of ages, that’s how we’ve learned that parable that Jesus told in Luke 15. In fact, it may be one of the most famous parables that He’s told. When we were young, we learned it as preschoolers and we know it as adults. It’s the parable of the prodigal son. It’s the wayward son who asked for half of his inheritance and then he goes off and he squanders it away on wild living, only to end up destitute, coming back to the father, expecting nothing but receiving everything as the father welcomes him in his open arms and reinstates him as a son, thus demonstrating for us God’s love and God’s grace. But it’s the prodigal son. It’s the wayward son.

Except prodigal doesn’t mean wayward. It means a reckless spendthrift. It means to spend until you having nothing left. Well, that describes the son. He certainly was a reckless spendthrift and he spent everything, his entire inheritance until he had nothing left. It describes him well. But does it not also describe our God? Has He not been reckless with His grace towards us? Has He not been willing to spend everything to bring us back into the family, not counting the cost, even the cost of His Son’s very life. So we can call Him the prodigal God, a God of reckless grace.

Beginning this week and for the next six weeks, we really want to dig in and understand the reckless grace of God, this prodigal God that Jesus reveals for us so clearly in Luke 15. He does it through three stories or three parables but most of our time will be spent on the third and final one that may more accurately be called The Parable of the Two Sons. That’s how Jesus introduced the story. He said a father had two sons. And unless we recognize that there are two sons involved here and unless we compare and contrast both of the sons, we will miss the full impact that Jesus was making on His audience at that time and the impact for us.

You see, there’s this contrast between the two sons. You have the younger son who was very, very bad and he wanders off and he squanders the wealth with wild living. But we have the older son who is very, very good, always faithful to his father. And yet we’ll discover that both sons are alienated from the father. The one is alienated because he’s very, very bad. The other one ends up being alienated because he’s very, very good.

This morning, we want to understand the cultural, historical context of the parable, to lay down a foundation for the weeks ahead as we dig in and mine out of Luke 15 the richness of God’s reckless grace for us and I hope you have a deeper understanding and appreciation for God’s love in the end.

We begin then at Luke 15. We read it a few moments ago in the New International Version, but I like how the New Living translation puts it. It says, “Tax collectors and other notorious sinners often came to listen to Jesus teach. This made the Pharisees and teachers of the religious law complain that He was associating with such despicable people, even eating with them.” So Jesus used this illustration. There are two audiences that Jesus is speaking to here. You have the tax collectors and the sinners, oddly enough the ones who keep following Jesus around and want to listen to Him. But the religious folk, those who were most well respected, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, they’re standing back at a distance and they’re sort of sniveling and muttering about this Jesus and His association with this group. Now part of that you can understand. Tax collectors and sinners. You may recall tax collectors at that time, they make the IRS of today look like saints. Tax collectors at that time made their living by cheating people, overcharging them, extortion. They were very, very rich but they were very, very ostracized from all of society and they were excluded from the religious community completely.

The sinners who are talked about here, usually that refers to prostitutes, the destitute, the homeless. Or today, it’s probably the people when they’re walking down the sidewalk, you cross the road to walk on the other side. If you have the misfortune of standing next to them, there’s a stench about them that you really don’t care or you’re guarding your wallet because you’re wondering if they’re going to try to take it. If you walk into an alley and you see them, you would turn around and walk the other way for fear that you might get beat up and you might get mugged. We’re talking about the lowest of society here. They are the ones who are gathered around Jesus to listen to Him.

On the other side, you have the Pharisees and the teachers of the law and they look at Jesus and He’s eating with these people. Well, now as bad as that might seem to us today, for them, that was just a cultural no-no. To eat with somebody meant that you accepted them, that you were on level terms with them, that you were okay with them. How could Jesus be okay with these people? How could He accept them?

Meanwhile, the Pharisees and teachers of the law, if you will, they’re on the other end of the spectrum. We have the very, very bad, the tax collectors and the sinners, and we have the very, very good, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law. Pharisees prided themselves on knowing the scriptures and following the scriptures to the letter of the law, even going beyond that to writings that surrounded the law they put into the most intricate detail of what a person should do and what a person shouldn’t do, what you should eat, when you should eat, how far you should walk on the Sabbath, what you shouldn’t do on the Sabbath, how to celebrate the feast of the Old Testament in the proper way, down to the inth degree. And the Pharisees prided themselves on following that exactly, being very, very faithful to God. They are the very, very good in their eyes.

So Jesus is speaking then to a very mixed audience, the very, very bad and the very, very good. What we’ll discover is that Jesus may be talking a little bit more to the very, very good than He is to the very, very bad.

There are two parables that lead up to the third one but, this morning, I want us to understand the third one because that’s where we’ll spend most of our time. It’s the most famous one. It’s the parable of the two sons. But how would this audience back in the ancient times, how would they understand the story that Jesus is saying to them. So let’s take off our 2010 glasses and try to go back culturally and historically to understand the message that Jesus was conveying to them.

So it began this way, “There was a man who had two sons. The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate.’ So he divided his property between the two of them.” Once again, I want to go to the New Living translation because it captures it just a little bit better. “A man had two sons. The younger son told his father, ‘I want my share of your estate now instead of waiting until you die.’” Because that’s really what the younger son was saying. You see, at that time, when the father, the patriarch, died, then his estate was divided between his sons. The eldest son always had a double portion and then the rest of it was divided equally among his children. Since he only has two sons, the elder brother will get two-thirds of the estate but the younger son will get one-third of the estate. But that only happens when he dies. The younger brother is wishing the father dead. You see, he doesn’t love the father. He loves what the father has. He doesn’t want to follow the father’s rules and regulations. He wants to set out on his own path, but he wants the things that the father has. He wants the wealth, the prestige, the honor, the comfort that the father has to offer but he doesn’t want anything else to do with the father and he doesn’t want to follow the father. He wants to go off and live by his own rules, so he is wishing the father dead.

Now first of all, at that time, it would have been expected for the father, at this point, with verbal if not physical blows, to beat the son out of the household and to kick him off of the property, never to be seen again. The audience is shocked in the next line where He says, “So the father divided his estate,” unheard of. But it’s deeper than that. For us today, if one of our kids would have the audacity to ask for their share of their inheritance, to insult us in such a way, at least it would be a private matter. We would have to cash in some CD’s, dip into the 401K and the only ones who would know that was happening would really be the family and maybe your broker. There are no CD’s. There’s no 401K. The wealth of the family is in the land and in the livestock. The only way the father can give him one-third of the estate is he has to liquidate. He has to sell part of his property. This is a public event. His humiliation is with the whole community now, as he has to sell part of his land. But it goes deeper than that and if anyone can understand it, lifelong Iowans should be able to understand the pain and the agony of having to sell property. You see, I’m a city boy so selling a piece of property, buying a piece of property, “Yeah, so what, it’s dirt.” No, no, no. Not the family farm, right? You hang onto the family farm. You may not have seen the family farm for years. That doesn’t matter. It’s the family farm. It’s part of who you are. It’s part of your identity. So it was, at this time. It was part of the father’s identity. To sell off part of his land was to rip his life apart and to sell off part of himself. That’s the request of the younger brother and he knows it. And yet, the father grants his request. He tears his life apart and he gives a third of it to the younger brother.

What’s the result of this action? Well, the younger son decides he’s going to go off and live life on his own rules. This is what happened, “After he had spent everything, there was a severe famine in the whole country and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to a citizen in that country. They sent him to the field to feed pigs. He longed to fill his stomach with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything.” He goes off into wild living, squanders it away, prostitutes, gambling, every kind of debauchery that you can imagine, that’s what he does. And somehow he goes through the entire third of the estate. Wouldn’t you know it, a famine hits at the time. He hires himself out, now picture this, a Jewish man feeding pigs. Swine are unclean. You don’t want to have anything to do with them. And he is so destitute that he longs to eat what the pigs are eating. Do you understand the condition of the younger brother here?

Scripture goes on and it says, “Finally, he came to his senses. He says, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have food to spare and here I am starving to death. I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worth to be called your son.’” You see, the younger brother understands that he no longer is a son of the family. He’s cashed out. He’s taken his third of the estate. He has rejected the father. He’s walked away from the father. He can no longer be a son in the family. But maybe, maybe beyond hope, he can go back and he can become one of the hired men. Now he could never hope to pay back his father the estate that he took from him but at least, maybe he could make an effort, maybe he could try to make it up to his father for what he’s done.

So he sets back on the road longing to see his father and hoping for mercy. So as he’s walking down the road, rehearsing his speech, “Father, I’m no longer worthy to be called your son. Make me one of your hired men,” scripture says this, Jesus goes on and He says, “But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him, was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him.” Patriarchs of this day never ran. It was beyond their dignity to run. For them, that meant they would have to hoist up their robes and expose their legs, a shameful thing to do in culture at that time. You would never, ever expose your legs. And yet, the father is moved to such compassion for his son that he scorns the shame, the humiliation and he runs to his son and wraps his arms around him. Before the son can strike a deal, before the son can try to say, “Now, Father, I can’t be your son anymore but let me strike a deal with you here,” he wraps his arms around him. He kisses him and he says, “Bring him the best robe.” Who has the best robe? It’s the father’s robe. His very own robe he wraps around his son, puts sandals on his feet, a ring on his finger. It would be the signet ring of the family, the ring that was used to seal contracts. So immediately, he reinstates him to full son-ship.

The younger brother can’t earn his way back into the family and, before he even has an attempt to say, “Can I start trying to pay you back, Father,” it doesn’t even equal into the equation. The father freely automatically reinstates him to full son-ship. This half of the parable you and I can understand very well. Traditionally, this is where we’ve spent most of our time when we’ve explained the parable. We understand the very, very bad. We understand the wayward son, the son who squanders away the living, the son who rejects the father. We recognize this as sin. It’s easy to recognize. He has insulted the father. He wants to live by his own rules. He rejects the rules of the father. He wants to live by the ways of the world. He has wild living, all the debauchery. We understand that. And finally, he recognizes that destitute, he comes back to the father. We can relate our own sinfulness, the times we have turned our back on God, decided to live life on our own terms, the times we have done so many foolish things that we regret, the things that we feel guilty about and then to hear the story that we have a heavenly Father, that He comes and He runs to us, we don’t even go to Him, He runs to us and He wraps His arms around us and He reinstates us as sons and daughters through the blood of His Son, Jesus. This part of the parable we understand. We understand our sinful behavior and how that can alienate us from our Father in heaven.

But it’s only half the story. There are two sons, remember? Let’s find out about the older brother. “But the father says, ‘Put a robe on him, put a ring on his finger.’ He says, ‘Bring the fattened calf in and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate, for this son of mine who was dead is alive again. He was lost and is found.’” So they began to celebrate. Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing so he called one of the servants and asked what was going on. “Your brother has come,” he replied, “And your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.” The older brother became angry and refused to go in. Understand the context of this. You did not have meat at every meal at this time. It was a delicacy. It was an expensive item. The father has taken the choice calf, the fattened calf, the one they have been preparing for the best celebration they could come up with and he has killed that and he is throwing a party. The entire community would be invited to this celebration. This is the most important day of the father’s life, bar none, demonstrated by the party, demonstrated by the fattened calf being killed. He is sparing no expense to celebrate that this younger son has returned, most important day in his life. And the elder brother refuses to go in, thus insulting his father.

Culturally at this time, once again, it would be expected that the father would throw him off his property, with verbal and physical blows to insult the patriarch in such a way as to not come in. What it demonstrates here is that the older brother doesn’t care for the father. He doesn’t love the father. If he loved the father, he would go in on this most important day of his life and celebrate with him. Instead, he becomes angry.

Now the older son is alienated from his father, but what has alienated him? He tells us. First of all, he is disrespectful to his father. He does not address him as his father. He says, “Look. All these years.” In other words, “Look you, all these years I’ve been slaving for you and I never disobeyed your orders. You never gave me even a young goat so that I could celebrate with my friends, but when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you’ve killed the fattened calf for him.” He will not acknowledge him as his father, and he will not acknowledge his brother. “Look you. This son of yours,” he says. Insulting his father, but why is it? What has alienated him from that? “I have never disobeyed you.”

It is his obedience that has alienated him from the father. Because he has been faithful, he now will not go into the party. You see, he didn’t love the father either. He loved what the father had. The younger son loved what the father had, so he took it and went away. The older son loved what the father had, but he stayed and was obedient to the father with the expectation that he also would get what the father had, the wealth, the prestige, the comfort. And when he doesn’t get it, he becomes very, very angry with the father.

This is the challenging part of the parable for us. As good Christians, sometimes do we not have expectations of our Father? We’ve lived a good life. We’ve done our best to be faithful to God. Therefore, we expect that our prayers are going to be answered. Therefore, we expect that we’re going to live a relatively good life and when something goes wrong in our life or when our prayers are not answered, we become very, very angry with God because He hasn’t delivered the goods to us. “We’ve done what you’ve asked us to do, God. We’ve been obedient to you. We’ve worshiped you. We followed your rules and regulations. Now, God, this isn’t fair that my life has gone south. God, why aren’t you answering my prayers? I’ve done all that you’ve asked me to do.” It’s not then our sin that separates us from God; it’s our righteousness. We’re not being obedient to God because we love God but because we want what God has.

The parable ends on a cliffhanger because there’s no reconciliation. What will happen? Will the elder brother go into the party or will he continue to insult his father and stay outside? Jesus leaves it open because here, Jesus is reaching out to the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, those who because of their righteousness are separated from God. He reaches out to them and He opens up the door for them saying, “The Father wants you also in His kingdom. The Father also wants you at the final banquet into heavenly ranks.” You see, the father is reaching out to both the younger son and the older son because he wants to bring both of them in and He wants to show both of them His grace and the gift of His salvation.

Over the next few weeks, probably more than once, if you’re like me at least, you’re going to ask yourself, “Am I the younger brother or am I being the elder brother here?” What I want you to remember through the whole six weeks is the father goes to both. Scorning the shame, he runs to the younger brother and he reinstates him as a son. Scorning the humiliation of the insult, he goes outside the banquet to the elder brother and pleads with him to come back in to be a part of the family.

Whether you’re a younger brother or an elder brother, God reaches out to you through His Son, Jesus, to make you His sons and daughters once again. Amen.

Copyright 2009 Gloria Dei Lutheran Church