top of page

Lost and Found

  • Writer: Simon
    Simon
  • Oct 11, 2020
  • 3 min read

Luke 15

ree

Reading through Luke's gospel today, I came to one of the best known chapters in the whole Bible - chapter 15. I don't know how many times I must have read this, preached on it, discussed it and written about it. Yet there is hardly an occasion when I haven't gained something new; perhaps picked up on a new detail and seen the wonderful story of salvation in a new way.

Reading the parable of the Prodigal Son again, I noticed the phrase 'he divided his property between them' (v12). The younger son had demanded his share, effectively saying that he wished his father were dead, and gone off to live his own life. Isn't that what we say to God when we try and run our lives in our own way? That things would be more convenient without Him. That accountability to our Heavenly Father is a restriction on what we want to do. Romans 1 speaks of those who did not think it good to have God in their knowledge so God gave them up to a depraved mind, etc. The father doesn't appear to try and prevent his son's decision but allows him to leave on his own terms. Of course this is a parable, but you wonder whether the son gave his father a second thought during his life of wild living and depravity. However a moment of realisation dawned on him when famine struck, the money ran out and he couldn't even feed himself. The only job he could get was watching pigs - a complete humiliation to any Jew. He longed to eat the pig food but it would have completely indigestible - he couldn't have eaten it if he'd tried.

What does it take for us to realise that habits and priorities in our lives have taken us away from God? In the gospel, God causes us to realise our separation from Him and our complete inability to save ourselves. He gives us the same realisation as the Prodigal Son, that the only place we should be is in the Father's house. The only way to the Father's house, Jesus says in John 14, is through Christ who is the way, the truth and the life.

But back to that phrase 'between them'. The older son also got his share and, as the eldest, would have got a double share - two thirds of the inheritance. At the end of the parable, when his younger brother has returned, he demands credit for not spending it all in the debauched manner of his brother. He was missing the point. The true inheritance was the Father's house. The legal minds that Jesus was speaking to would have similarly missed the point. They would easily seen the younger son as the sinners that they so despised. But here is the good news of the gospel, that salvation is offered to sinners. There is a way back to the Father's house. The older son appears to have no appreciation of it, despite living there, or any knowledge of his father's heart. Likewise, the Pharisees considered themselves to be righteous and in no need of a Saviour, yet they seemed to have no real knowledge of God. There is no credit to be gained for a life of good works and following the law if we do not know God. It was the younger son who ultimately appeared to have the greater appreciation of his father's house and therefore is the one that the father rejoices over.

Thank God that He rejoices over every repenting sinner and makes us a part of His glorious, heavenly household!



 
 
 

3 Comments


7.genien
Oct 11, 2020

I can't comment under your comment so this makes sense. I don't see it that way at all. I think there is a little sibling rivalry going on. Imagine for a moment you in the older brothers shoes. Your younger brother whom you love runs off with his inheritance and squanders his portion. On the other hand your smart, you stay at home with dad and do what your suppose to do. You come home at one point to see dad throwing a big party for your sibling. I think I'd be irked. I'd also get over it because I love my siblings. I think its a normal emotion. I guess either way there is a lesson to be learned.

Like

Simon
Simon
Oct 11, 2020

Hi, good to hear from you and thanks for your comment. I would agree in that the older son is not necessarily the Pharisees themselves, but the attitude is the same. This parable and the previous two are in response to the Pharisees criticising the Lord for receiving and eating with sinners (V2). They thought they were close to God because of their heritage and obedience to the law. Yet they showed themselves not to understand the heart of God. The older son had every privilege, and been obedient to his father and shared his wealth, yet shows that he doesn't know the father because he doesn't share his heart and joy over the return of the prodigal. He only…

Like

7.genien
Oct 11, 2020

I think there was sibling jealousy between the sons but I cannot compare the older son to the Pharisee's. The older son was not cast away, the father replied to 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.’”


The older son is always with the father and he responds "everything I have is yours".

Like
Post: Blog2_Post

Subscribe Form

Thanks for submitting!

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

©2020 by Feed My Sheep. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page