Post by Lee on Mar 23, 2014 16:23:44 GMT
THE PARABLE OF THE PRODIGAL SON
There appears to be no special difficulty about the parable of the prodigal son.—(Luke 15.) Its connection gives the key. “The Pharisees and Scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them.” Christ answers this murmur by appealing to their own particular joy when they found the sheep or the piece of money they had lost. So, said he, “There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.” This was a reason why he should do what they murmured at. He illustrates the thing still further. A certain man have two sons—(the two classes of the second verse—1. The Pharisees and Scribes. 2. The sinners) the younger of them left his father’s house and squandered his living: that is, the sinners in Israel had departed from God and made shipwreck of their well-being and their hope in the ways of transgression. After a season he returns and seeks forgiveness. The inferior part of the nation, being called upon by John the Baptist to “Repent,” submitted to his baptism for the remission of sins, and rejoiced in Christ’s endorsement of John “being baptised with the baptism of John”—(Luke 7:29.) Even “the publicans and harlots” in this way came back for a season to righteous ways.—(Matt. 21:31, 32.) The prodigal son’s father receives him gladly and forgives him and makes a feast for him. Christ received the sinners who came to him, eating with them, and comforting and instructing them, saying “He that cometh unto me, I will in no wise cast out.” The elder son is angry at the prodigal son’s reception: the Pharisees and Scribes murmured at Christ’s association with the common people, particularly those who were considered sinners by eminence; contending by inference that if he was the Messiah, he ought to have chosen the society of the Pharisees who thought themselves righteous. In reply to the murmur, The father said, Son thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine. It is probably here that the most difficulty is experienced in applying the parable, in view of the fact that the Pharisees, as a body, were condemned by Christ, and foretold to be doomed to exclusion from the kingdom of God at the time when strangers should come from all points of the compass to inherit it. But the difficulty disappears if we recollect that the class represented by the Pharisees of Christ’s day—viz., the house of Levi—will in all their generations, yield a large proportion of the heirs of the kingdom. Moses and Aaron belong to that class, and also the majority of the prophets; men of faith and obedience. They are essentially the elder son class, for Levi had the priority which appertains to inheritance in the house of God. Their representatives in the days of Christ murmured at the favour shewn to the reprobate in Israel—the younger son class, for they ranked after Levi. Christ here illustrates the meetness of making merry at the recovery of those who had gone far out of the way. The elder-son class, righteous men who need no repentance; and the younger-son class, unrighteous men forsaking their evil ways and returning to the Lord who abundantly pardons, (Isaiah 55:7), will inherit the kingdom together and rejoice in their mutual society, forgetful of the mistakes of the past. Those of the Pharisees hearing the parable who were real members of the elder-son class (and there were many, including Paul, and a great company, who afterwards believed, Acts 6:7, ) would see the wisdom of the lesson. As for the others (those who were of the elderson class but not truly belonging to it), they were rebuffed beyond the power of reply. Difficulties in the way of understanding the parables arise in most cases from neglecting the occasion of them, and from seeking to find an exact mathematical parallel to every detail. We have heard tanciful explanations of the parable of the prodigal son, arising from this cause. In most cases it is only a general purport, and in getting at this, we must always be strictly bound by Christ’s object in the parable, which can generally be learnt from the context.
1874 The Christadelphian: Volume 12. 2001 (electronic ed.) (519). Birmingham: Christadelphian Magazine & Publishing Association.
There appears to be no special difficulty about the parable of the prodigal son.—(Luke 15.) Its connection gives the key. “The Pharisees and Scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them.” Christ answers this murmur by appealing to their own particular joy when they found the sheep or the piece of money they had lost. So, said he, “There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.” This was a reason why he should do what they murmured at. He illustrates the thing still further. A certain man have two sons—(the two classes of the second verse—1. The Pharisees and Scribes. 2. The sinners) the younger of them left his father’s house and squandered his living: that is, the sinners in Israel had departed from God and made shipwreck of their well-being and their hope in the ways of transgression. After a season he returns and seeks forgiveness. The inferior part of the nation, being called upon by John the Baptist to “Repent,” submitted to his baptism for the remission of sins, and rejoiced in Christ’s endorsement of John “being baptised with the baptism of John”—(Luke 7:29.) Even “the publicans and harlots” in this way came back for a season to righteous ways.—(Matt. 21:31, 32.) The prodigal son’s father receives him gladly and forgives him and makes a feast for him. Christ received the sinners who came to him, eating with them, and comforting and instructing them, saying “He that cometh unto me, I will in no wise cast out.” The elder son is angry at the prodigal son’s reception: the Pharisees and Scribes murmured at Christ’s association with the common people, particularly those who were considered sinners by eminence; contending by inference that if he was the Messiah, he ought to have chosen the society of the Pharisees who thought themselves righteous. In reply to the murmur, The father said, Son thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine. It is probably here that the most difficulty is experienced in applying the parable, in view of the fact that the Pharisees, as a body, were condemned by Christ, and foretold to be doomed to exclusion from the kingdom of God at the time when strangers should come from all points of the compass to inherit it. But the difficulty disappears if we recollect that the class represented by the Pharisees of Christ’s day—viz., the house of Levi—will in all their generations, yield a large proportion of the heirs of the kingdom. Moses and Aaron belong to that class, and also the majority of the prophets; men of faith and obedience. They are essentially the elder son class, for Levi had the priority which appertains to inheritance in the house of God. Their representatives in the days of Christ murmured at the favour shewn to the reprobate in Israel—the younger son class, for they ranked after Levi. Christ here illustrates the meetness of making merry at the recovery of those who had gone far out of the way. The elder-son class, righteous men who need no repentance; and the younger-son class, unrighteous men forsaking their evil ways and returning to the Lord who abundantly pardons, (Isaiah 55:7), will inherit the kingdom together and rejoice in their mutual society, forgetful of the mistakes of the past. Those of the Pharisees hearing the parable who were real members of the elder-son class (and there were many, including Paul, and a great company, who afterwards believed, Acts 6:7, ) would see the wisdom of the lesson. As for the others (those who were of the elderson class but not truly belonging to it), they were rebuffed beyond the power of reply. Difficulties in the way of understanding the parables arise in most cases from neglecting the occasion of them, and from seeking to find an exact mathematical parallel to every detail. We have heard tanciful explanations of the parable of the prodigal son, arising from this cause. In most cases it is only a general purport, and in getting at this, we must always be strictly bound by Christ’s object in the parable, which can generally be learnt from the context.
1874 The Christadelphian: Volume 12. 2001 (electronic ed.) (519). Birmingham: Christadelphian Magazine & Publishing Association.