At this stage in Jesus’ life, around AD 30, he has been severely criticised for “welcoming sinful people and eating with them.” His critics were the Jerusalem “Pharisees and theologians.” Now he provides the “parallel” of “a certain man” with “two sons.” Asked by “the newer” for his “set share of the existence,” the “father” gives that to both, keeping nothing back. All “human-living”, theirs. Their free lives ahead of them.
“And not many days later, the newer son, gathering all, journeyed away into a long distant region and there he wasted his substance, living life carelessly. But, having spent everything, a mighty famine came to be throughout that same region and he began to be lacking. And, going, he joined himself to one of the citizens of that same region and he sent him into his fields to feed pigs. And he was longing to fill his belly with the pods which the pigs were eating and no one was giving to him.”
“The son” had nothing left, save a new porcine, consumptive identity.
|
|
“But, having come to himself, he declared, ‘How many of my father’s employees abound in bread, but I destroy myself here in famine. Rising up I will go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I sinned into heaven and in your presence. I am no longer deserving to be called your son. Make me like one of your employees!’ And rising up he came towards the father of himself. But he still being far distant from him, his father saw him and was compassionate and, running, fell upon his neck and kissed him. But the son said to him, ‘Father, I sinned into heaven and in your presence. I am no longer deserving to be called your son.’”
|
.
|
“The son” was “no longer deserving to be called your son.”
“But the father said to his slaves, ‘Immediately bring out the first robe! And clothe him! And give a ring onto his hand and shoes onto his feet! And bring the grain-fed offspring! Sacrifice! And, eating, we may celebrate because this my son was dying and is alive again, he was destroyed and is found.’ And they began to celebrate.”
Sonship restored. Plus “the first robe” and even more - awesome mercy.
“But his elder son was in a field, and, when coming, he drew near to the house. He heard music and dancing and, calling near one of the servant-boys, he inquired what these things were. But the person said to him that, ‘Your brother has arrived and your father has sacrificed the grain-fed offspring, because he has received him back - well.’
“The elder son” is very upset. For the second time Jesus mentions the “sacrificed grain-fed offspring.” A third mention would follow (below).
|
|
But he was angry and was not desiring to come in. But his father, coming out, called out to him. But, answering, he said to his father, ‘Look and see! These many years I am serving you, and I never bypassed your commandments and you never gave to me a young goat, so that I may have celebrated with my friends. But when this your son of yours came, the one having devoured your human-life with prostitutes, you sacrificed the grain-fed offspring for him.’
|
.
|
“The elder son” was particularly opposed to the “sacrificed grain-fed offspring.” Those listening to Jesus that day, were well aware that their Jewish national identity – and merciful release from captivity in Egypt around BC 1400 - arose from the sacrifice of passover lambs. So important was this that, in AD 30, lambs were annually sacrificed – in remembrance - in the Jerusalem Temple at Easter. The “angry ... elder son” would not accept that undeserved mercy should ever apply to another, to a “sinner.”
But he said to him, ‘Child, you yourself are always with me, and all my things are yours. But it is necessary to celebrate and rejoice because this your brother was dead, and lives and, destroyed, has been found.’”
“The father” must “celebrate” the life-from-the-dead of his once-upon-a-time self-orientated “newer son.” Did the “elder son” lose anything?
|
|
|
