A Tale of TWO SONS

A Tale of TWO SONS
by
John MacArthur

 
… “feeding on husks” (referring to the consumption of trivial, shallow, or worldly things that can’t really give nourishment); or “riotous living” (meaning a dissolute or  extravagant lifestyle). (p. xii)
 
The parable of the prodigal son is not a warm and fuzzy feel-good message, but it is powerful wake-up call with a very earnest warning. (p. xiii)
 
Parables are plainly and purposely figurative, but they are not allegories, in which every detail carries some kind of symbolism. A parable is a simple metaphor or simile conveyed in story form. It is first and foremost a comparison. (p. xiv)
 
Indeed, the context of Luke 15, with its theme of heavenly joy over earthly repentance, makes perfect sense of all the major features of the parable….. And the elder brother’s cold indifference- the real focal point of the story, as it  turns out – is a vivid representation of the same evil hypocrisy Jesus was confronting in the hearts of the hostile scribes and Pharisees to whom He told the parable in the first place (Luke 15:2). (p.xvi)
 
For heedless unbelievers (especially those like the scribes and Pharisees, who use external righteousness as a mask for unrighteous hearts), the elder brother is a reminder that neither a show of religion nor the pretense of respectability is a valid substitute for redemption. (p.xviii)
 
The parable therefore had a polemic purpose, delivering a sophisticated and well-aimed rebuke at the religious elite of Jesus’ day. (p. 4)
 
Bear in mind, too, that the meaning of Scripture is not fluid. The truth of the Bible doesn’t change with time or mean different things in different cultures. Whatever the text meant when it was originally written, it still means today.  (p.5)
 
Surely the Pharisees did not really believe it was reasonable to write off Jesus’ miracles as satanic. But their insistence to the contrary was irrefutable proof of how thoroughly evil their hearts and motives were. (p.14)
 
It is significant that Jesus did not cloister Himself among spiritual people to avoid contact with sinners and lowlifes. (p.15)
 
In the culture of the time, enjoying table fellowship with someone was a privilege afforded only to friends, family, and one’s superiors. (p.16)
 
Jesus was by no means a participant in anyone’s sin; He was simply taking His ministry to the neediest of sinners. (p. 17)
 
In our culture, the tendency usually goes to the opposite extreme. Too many people today take God’s forgiveness for granted. They think of Him as so unconcerned about sin that things such as redemption, atonement, and the wrath of God are unsophisticated, crude, outmoded concepts. (p. 20)
 
Since Christ’s righteousness is absolutely perfect and His righteousness is imputed to the believing sinner (2 Corinthians 5:21), each sinner who repents instantly has a perfect standing before God, complete peace with Him, and no fear of future condemnation – all from the very first moment of faith (Romans 3: 25- 28; 5:1; 8:1). The biblical and theological term used to describe that reality is justification. (p.21)
 
His overtures to sinners were always in the context of seeking their salvation, offering His grace and mercy, and extending to them forgiveness. (p. 22)
 
He always responded much more positively to the outcasts of society than He did to the typically pompous religious leaders. (p.23)
 
The gospel message – with its promise of new life, full pardon, and spiritual cleansing – drew to Jesus those who were fed up with sin. (p. 25)
 
It’s the only one [parable] of the three that illustrates the sinner’s repentance. But it does so with a wonderful thoroughness, giving us perhaps the finest example in the New Testament of what true repentance looks like. (p. 33)
 
One of the important lessons we will learn form the negative example of the elder brother and the hard-shelled self-righteousness of the Pharisees is that it is possible to spend an entire lifetime in and around the household of faith, giving every appearance of diligent work and faithful service – and yet to be totally out of harmony with heaven’s joy. (p.37)
 
The main idea behind the word prodigal is that of wastefulness, immoderation, excess, and dissipation. (p. 42)
 
The Greek term there is asotos, meaning wastefulness – but don’t get the notion that the Prodigal’s dominant character flaw was merely that he was a spendthrift. As we’ll soon see, the Greek expression is much stronger than that, conveying strong overtones of licentiousness, promiscuity, and moral debauchery. (p.43)
 
A principle known as the law of primogeniture governed the transfer of a family’s  inheritance in Israel. It meant the firstborn son would receive a double portion of the family legacy. (p. 44)
 
Any son who made such a breathtaking inappropriate request from a healthy father would have been regarded as the lowest form of miscreant. (p. 46)
 
Even today in strict Jewish families, parents will sometimes say “kaddish” (the formal recitation of a funeral prayer) over a son or daughter who is disowned for this kind of behavior. (p. 46)
 
That perfectly illustrates the foolishness of the sinner. He wants to get away from God, and he is more concerned with doing it now than he is with what it might cost him in the future. (p. 57)
 
Of course, anyone who spurns every duty, casts off all responsibility, flees every hint of accountability, and pursues that kind of immoral lifestyle is going to come to total ruin in no time at all. (p.61)
 
So for the first time in his life, the younger son was determined to walk away from his sin, submit to his father’s authority, plead for his father’s forgiveness, and submit to his father’s authority. (p. 83)
 
Here, I am convinced, is where true repentance always begins: with an accurate assessment of one’s own condition. (p. 89)
 
Multitudes are kept in spiritual darkness and under the condemnation of heaven because they simply refuse to confess how needy they are. (p. 90)
 
The Greek word translated “hired servants” in this verse is misthios. It refers to day laborers – the lowest of all workers on the economic scale.(p. 91)
 
The Greek word for repentance throughout the New Testament is metanoia, and its literal meaning speaks of a change of mind – a reversal in one’s thinking. (p. 94)
 
But something also tells him he can cast himself on the Father’s mercy, forgiveness, and love – and find some measure of acceptance. This is the flip side of true repentance, and it’s the very essence of saving faith. (p. 98)
 
If they [Pharisees] thought of God’s role in redemption at all, they regarded His grace only as a merciful supplement to whatever effort the sinner himself could put forth to secure favor. (p. 100)
 
Consider this: of all the iniquities the Prodigal had indulged in, the one sin with the most potential for evil was the great distance he had put between him and his father. (p. 102)
 
In that culture, no one would even think of taking him in if his own father declared him an outcast. (p. 108)
 
…noblemen in that culture did not run. (p. 113)
 
The father in effect positioned himself between his son and all the scorn, taunting, and abuse people in that culture would naturally have heaped on the boy’s head. (p. 115)
 
Such an embrace with repeated kisses was a gesture that signified not only the father’s delirious joy but also his full acceptance, friendship, love, forgiveness, restoration, and total reconciliation. (p.117)
 
Remember that the main point Jesus was making in this parable was for the Pharisee’s benefit. He was addressing their faulty idea about God – that He found joy in their self-righteousness rather than in the forgiveness of sins. (p. 119)
 
Forgiveness is not the reward for merits we earn by good works. Don’t imagine, however, that practical righteousness is eliminated altogether – because good works are the inevitable fruit of faith. (p. 123)
 
Notice that Christ emptied Himself not by ceasing to be God, and not by divesting himself of His divine nature or attributes, but by taking a real, authentic human nature on Himself and thereby covering His glory with the shroud of His humanity. (p. 130)
 
In the words of Romans 4:5, Christ “justifies the ungodly.” If that thought doesn’t make you want to weep with gratitude, then you have probably never felt yourself in the place of  the Prodigal Son, and you need to pray for repentance. (p. 131)
 
The Pharisees had therefore convinced themselves that they were far more righteous – and therefore even more glorious – than He was. (p. 131)
 
Usufruct is a Latin expression that literally means “use of the fruits,” and it describes the legal right to use someone else’s property or assets freely and reap the fruits of them as if they were one’s own personal possessions. (p. 132)
 
The message was clear: the father was granting the boy not only full forgiveness and full reconciliation but also the full privileges of a nobleman’s son who has come of age and proved himself trustworthy. (p.  135)
 
They had a special calf, well fed and deliberately underexercised, in order to produce the most tender, tasty, prime meat. The Greek expression translated “fatted” literally means grain fed. (p. 137)
 
For the first time ever, the Prodigal had a real, vital relationship with a loving, forgiving father who gave him full rights to everything he possessed, and blessing upon blessing. (p. 139)
 
Sinners come in two basic varieties. Some are straightforward and intrepid in their evildoing, and they don’t really care who sees what they do. Invariably, their besetting sin is pride – the kind of pride that is seen in an undue love for oneself  and uncontrollable lusts for self-indulgent pleasures.
At the other end of the spectrum are secretive sinners, who prefer to sin when they think no one else is looking. They try to mask their more obvious sins in various ways – often with the pretense of religion. Their besetting sin is also pride, but it’s the kind of pride that manifests itself in hypocrisy. (p. 147)
 
The Greek expression translated “safe and sound” in the English version is the same root from which our word hygiene is derived. It speaks of wholeness, cleansing, and health. (p. 159)
 
The elder brother was every bit as self-seeking and devoid of true appreciation for the father as the Prodigal Son was at the beginning of the parable. (p. 161)
 
In the end, He said, tax collectors and prostitutes who repent will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the most diligently religious Pharisees will not – unless they likewise repent and acknowledge their total dependence on divine grace and God’s righteousness rather than their own good works and self-righteousness.  (p.168)
 
In this no-fault age where seared consciences are mass produced by public education, we have already seen two or three generations come to adulthood having been thoroughly indoctrinated with the kind of self-esteemism that deliberately teaches them to believe they are never actually in the wrong, no matter what. (p. 178)
 
In their [Pharisees] ideal scenario, the father would see the elder son’s point, make a public apology to the elder son, publicly shame the Prodigal for his foolish behavior, and then perhaps even cast the Prodigal out forever. But the Pharisees surely saw the point Jesus was making clearly enough that they knew the story would never take a turn like that. (p. 196)
 
In contemporary academic circles, such an approach would be recognized as a rather extreme form of narrative theology. That’s a fashionable buzzword these days, used to describe a large family of novel ideas about how we should interpret the Bible (with special emphasis on the “story” rather than the truth claims of Scripture). The stylishness of narrative theology has led to vast amounts of discussion – and a considerable measure of confusion – about Jesus’ role as a storyteller. (p. 203)
 
In fact, Matthew 13: 34-35 sums up the proper perspective on the parables and their truth-value in very simple terms: “Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables; and without a parable He did not speak to them, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet saying: ‘I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world.’” He was quoting Psalm 78:2-4, which describe the primary purpose of the parables as a means of revelation, not obfuscation. The only context in which the parables deliberately conceal the truth or cloak it in mystery is in the face of willful, hostile unbelief. (p.207)
 
The truth-value of every proposition is binary: it can only be either true or false. There is no middle value. And there is the rub as far as postmodern thinking is concerned: propositions do not allow for any ambiguity. (p. 208)
 
What they generally are arguing for is a fluid, subjective, ambiguous concept of truth itself.(p. 209)
 
So the postmodern attempt to divorce truth from propositions is nothing more than a way of talking about truth, toying with the idea of truth, and giving lip service to the existence of truth – without actually needing to affirm anything as true or deny anything as false. (p. 209)