Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bluebell

The Parable Of The Prodigal Son

Recommended Posts

I would disagree. I think the ultimate question becomes "CAN God save us when we refuse to repent."

I believe there is evidence that He does/can. Rhino can speak to it better than I since I am not sold yet. Still the evidence is there.

what is the evidence that supports that belief?

:P

Share this post


Link to post

You are making the assertion that repentance is a work. Define work and tell me how it is.

How is repentance not a work? It is one of the hardest things out there to do sometimes. I have to work hard to quit doing whatever it was (especially if it was addictive). I have to feel a godly sorrow for doing it. (That in itself is hard enough.) Then I have to try and make up for whatever it was I did wrong if able or to the best of my abilities. Then I have to never do that again. All of this for the love of Christ and Heavenly Father.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually He would start forgiving us when we are still in the repentance process as well. But repentance is very hard so it is much easier if you can, not to mess up in the first place. However He will always love us and accept us back. He accepts us as His children even when we don't repent, but our eternal life will be different.

Not sure I can support this. The process is done by God. Allowing the process is a moments decision (Arminiam - shoot, I don't know how to spell it!!) I don't find it hard at all other than - one must be willing having one's humanistic view turn 180 degrees.

Please note for all you professors (of which there are too many here)- I wrote 180 not 360

Share this post


Link to post

Hoops22:

God of course CAN do anything He wants. But I find no Scriptural evidence that He does.

Share this post


Link to post

to quit doing whatever it was (especially if it was addictive).

THATs hard work. But has nothing to do with salvatory repentance.

Peter is a good example.

Share this post


Link to post

Hoops22:

God of course CAN do anything He wants. But I find no Scriptural evidence that He does.

Really?

Genesis 6:7

7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earthâ??men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the airâ??for I am grieved that I have made them."

Judges 2:18

18 Whenever the LORD raised up a judge for them, he was with the judge and saved them out of the hands of their enemies as long as the judge lived; for the LORD had compassion on them as they groaned under those who oppressed and afflicted them.

Acts 1:16

16and said, "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesusâ??

That's a start. You see the sovereignty of God here. He will do what He wishes.

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure I can support this. The process is done by God. Allowing the process is a moments decision (Arminiam - shoot, I don't know how to spell it!!) I don't find it hard at all other than - one must be willing having one's humanistic view turn 180 degrees.

Please note for all you professors (of which there are too many here)- I wrote 180 not 360

I believe Christ said in Matthew that unless we forgive others we can not be forgiven. The repentance process is about forgiveness.....especially forgiveness of ourselves. So wouldn't the same hold true here? If I did something bad and wouldn't forgive myself for that sin against myself......Christ might not forgive me if I don't forgive myself.

Share this post


Link to post

That's a start. You see the sovereignty of God here. He will do what He wishes.

This is a different point than TSS was making.

God can lie-but He won't, right?

God can be unjust, but He won't ever make that choice.

Saying there are some things that God won't do is not the same thing as denying His sovereignty or saying that there are some things He can't do.

:P

Share this post


Link to post

I believe Christ said in Matthew that unless we forgive others we can not be forgiven. The repentance process is about forgiveness.....especially forgiveness of ourselves. So wouldn't the same hold true here? If I did something bad and wouldn't forgive myself for that sin against myself......Christ might not forgive me if I don't forgive myself.

Of course Christ was preaching "The Kingdom" then. The age of grace was ushered in at his death and his claim of God"ness" was proved at His resurrection.

No, His forgiveness is not dependent on our forgiving anyone. When Christ was preaching He was preaching of a higher law yet to come at His death.

Salvatory repentance is conceding who we are and who He is. Christian repentance is a continuous process - and in this respect I agree. Your view would follow that any unrepented sin would cancel our salvation. I can't speak for you but there are a bunch that I have not repented of - so am I in trouble?

Share this post


Link to post

This is a different point than TSS was making.

God can lie-but He won't, right?

God can be unjust, but He won't ever make that choice.

Saying there are some things that God won't do is not the same thing as denying His sovereignty or saying that there are some things He can't do.

:P

No.

No.

Because He can not do what is not in his Nature. It would be like asking me to jump like a frog (I could 30 pounds ago!!).

But it is in His nature to save us, therefor, he can save whom He will.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know.

You are making the assertion that repentance is a work. Define work and tell me how it is.

This is quite juvenile, but I have to tell you "I asked first."

Share this post


Link to post

This is quite juvenile, but I have to tell you "I asked first."

How so? You are making the positive assertion.

In this context, any thing done by us that adds to the salvatory process/event.

Share this post


Link to post

The parable focuses on the state of mankind and the rejoicing over sinners who repent and turn back to god. As it is applied to us and the atonement, we all are at some point the prodigal son. In other phrases and parables Christ refers to us as the "lost sheep" who he came into the world to save. Lost sheep are equated to being "sinners". The "lost sheep" and the "prodigal son" are the same people- us! At some point in life I feel that all of us, either briefly or apparently indefinatley get "lost" and need Christ to redeem us from our lost state. The lost state we end up in here in mortality is a spiritually dead condition or a spiritually fallen condition. The way the atonement applies here is that no matter how far we stray and get lost we can always come back and Christ will forgive us as long as we are willing to be humble and obedient to his commands. So will the prodigal son reap eternal life in the end? Let me ask all of you this- Will all of you sinners hope to reap eternal life in the end? Will you be glad to repent and come back into the fold of Christ and be joyous when Christ is there with the fatted calf in your behalf?

I think then it is simple, it does not matter where we are all in life as long as we are working towards our salvation. Everyone of us makes different decisions and accepts the truth under different circumstances. It is true that some are more diligent than others but all will recieve eternal life in the end- salvation the greatest gift. The difference will be however that the sooner you get on the path the better off you feel and will be in the end whereas the procrastinators will be not as far along but will still be on the same path having also been given eternal life.

And no, Christ will not nor cannot save the people who choose not to repent!

Share this post


Link to post

I would disagree. I think the ultimate question becomes "CAN God save us when we refuse to repent."

I believe there is evidence that He does/can. Rhino can speak to it better than I since I am not sold yet. Still the evidence is there.

Why doesn't he then? When he tried to gather the people to His gospel, Christ lamented that they would not be gathered:

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! (Matthew 23:37).

Why didn't Christ gather them in?

In this context, any thing done by us that adds to the salvatory process/event.

Does repentance "add to" anything, is it a requirement?

Share this post


Link to post

as long as we are willing to be humble and obedient to his commands.

Did the father forgive the son before our after this?

Share this post


Link to post

No, His forgiveness is not dependent on our forgiving anyone. When Christ was preaching He was preaching of a higher law yet to come at His death.

Well...His death has come now. The higher law is now to be obeyed.

Salvatory repentance is conceding who we are and who He is. Christian repentance is a continuous process - and in this respect I agree.

I don't think so. If I believe in Christ, than I would need to follow what He says. It has nothing to do with conceding what He has done or who we are. We are sinners. To be washed clean by Christ we must do what He tells us to do. Then we are washed clean by the blood of Christ. It is really awesome.

Your view would follow that any unrepented sin would cancel our salvation. I can't speak for you but there are a bunch that I have not repented of - so am I in trouble?

I would be punished for my sins if I don't repent of them. It doesn't cancel my salvation. But rather than have Christ pay for them, I would need to. So yeah, if you are purposely not repenting of sins, you are in trouble in terms of you will be punished for them.

Share this post


Link to post

I do not believe that this parable is about works though it could be if you wanted to look at it that way.

I think that it is about love. Here is a man who squanders his inheritance, is he coming back because of repentance? I don't see too much repentance here, he is coming back to make his lifestyle easier on him. I see a very loving father who when he sees his son on his way back (at a long distance away) he goes to him and shows love toward him. The repentance process usually will take time sometimes even years. The love is always a constant and unconditional.

Our Father in Heaven as soon as he sees that we are turning again toward him he is running to us even when we are afar off. He welcomes us back and gives us the opportunity to once again be heirs to all that he has. The difference between God the Father and the father in the parable is that God never runs out of his inheritance. I cant explain that. All I know is its not measurable in our scientific, mathematical sense we now have. It is like the baskets of fish it keeps on replenishing itself.

What does that say about us if we feel that an adulterer should not receive the same. If that adulterer has repented would you ask Christ to suffer more than he had? Perhaps more drops of Christ's blood were spilt because of more severe sins does it make the pure and perfect sacrifice less? No it does not.

Alma the Younger was described as the "vilest of sinners" (Mosiah 28:4) to me that would probably include some premarital sex perhaps even adultery. But he repented. He allowed the atonement to work in his life and he was probably translated (Alma 45:18) only translated people I know are very, very righteous.

Share this post


Link to post
Salvatory repentance is conceding who we are and who He is. Christian repentance is a continuous process - and in this respect I agree.

It takes belief, or as you say "conceding," but it takes more than belief. It takes faith. For Latter-day Saints, faith includes works.

For many Evangelicals, it seems faith includes works, but you can't call them works.

On a trip to the country of the Gaderenes, Christ and His disciples encountered a man possessed of evil spirits calling themselves "Legion." The unclean spirits recognized Christ; they even believed in Him:

And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs. When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not. (For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness) (Luke 8:27-29).

Christ cast the demons out, they took up the body of pigs, which quickly ran to their deaths. Their belief in the power of Christ- they specifically demonstrated belief in His power by requesting to be allowed to enter pigs,- was not faith, it was just belief, acknowledgment. Even sure knowledge isn't faith.

Brigham Young explained:

A great many say, 'I believe the Gospel,' but continue to act wickedly, to do that which they know to be wrong. I wish you to fully understand that merely believing the Gospel, that Jesus is the Christ, in the Old and New Testaments, that Joseph Smith was a Prophet sent of God, and that the Book of Mormon is true, does not prepare you to become angels of light, sons and daughters of God, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ to a divine inheritance. Nor does mere belief entitle you to the possession of the crowns and thrones that you are anticipating.

No, such preparation can be made, and such objects attained only by doing the work required of us by our Father in heaven, by obeying Him in all things, letting our will, dispositions, and feelings fall to our feet, to rise no more, from this time henceforth, and actually operating upon the principle that we will do the will of our Father in heaven, no matter what comes upon us. Then, if you are going to be killed by your enemies, or destroyed by the adversary, you can say, 'Kill away, destroy away,' (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 2:248).

Belief and acknowledgment didn't help the unclean spirits any more than it would help us to believe without having faith. Faith leads to action; that is what faith is: belief unto action.

James was explicit on the matter, even mentioning the belief of demons not being true faith:

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble (James 2:17-20).

The main object of Brigham's comments was that belief doesn't equal faith. Even the demons tremble. But they never had faith unto repentance, and that makes all the difference.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, defining "work" would prove useful. I never thought of repentance as a work.

No. We must agree to making "the change". Now, whether God draws us to that change in a Calvinist way or not is another discussion, but regardless, I don't see repentance as a work.

Calvinist= He has not drawn them to Him.

Arminian = They have not made a "decision" for Christ.

Does that answer it? I'm not sure where you're headed.

Yeah, but walking back from the far country he had wasted his substance in, with no money, in the middle of a famine can certainly be regarded as work...his father (God) meets him along the way or saw him when he was yet a great way off as the scripture says and ran to him and helped him the rest of the way, employed his servants to aid him etc...This also shows that the journey of the repenting soul is not easy, but God meets us along the way..."We are saved by Grace, after all we can do..."

Share this post


Link to post

One thing you have to love about the scriptures is that the meaning can change due to when you read them and where you are. They also tend to have many meanings within them.

Layers, like onions. :P

Share this post


Link to post

Did the father forgive the son before our after this?

There is no question that it was after...absolutely no question...to beleive otherwise is to ignore the parable and inject your own doctrine into it...

Share this post


Link to post

I do not believe that this parable is about works though it could be if you wanted to look at it that way.

I think that it is about love. Here is a man who squanders his inheritance, is he coming back because of repentance? I don't see too much repentance here, he is coming back to make his lifestyle easier on him. I see a very loving father who when he sees his son on his way back (at a long distance away) he goes to him and shows love toward him. The repentance process usually will take time sometimes even years. The love is always a constant and unconditional.

If you don't see repentence than you are missing it completely...

Our Father in Heaven as soon as he sees that we are turning again toward him he is running to us even when we are afar off. He welcomes us back and gives us the opportunity to once again be heirs to all that he has. The difference between God the Father and the father in the parable is that God never runs out of his inheritance. I cant explain that. All I know is its not measurable in our scientific, mathematical sense we now have. It is like the baskets of fish it keeps on replenishing itself.

He did not come running as soon as the son decided to return...he was in a far country in the middle of a famine and had to return...His father did see him coming when he was a great way off, but he hardly pulled him from the pig pen or picked him up with a caravan of camels in the middle of the famished country now did he? This story says the road to repentence is difficult, God will meet us along the way, and then return to us our former station...\

Share this post


Link to post

In another thread, the topic of the prodigal son and salvation kept coming up, and there were quite a few different ideas about whether or not the prodigal son would receive exaltation, or simply salvation...

This is one of my favorite parables, and i really do love the treatment that Talmage gives it in his book, "Jesus the Christ".

Talmage, at this point in discussing the parable, moves to the faithful son's reaction to his wayward brother's return and says this-

"We are not justified in extolling the virtue of the repentance on the part of the prodigal above the faithful, plodding service of his brother, who had remained at home, true to the duties required of him. The devoted son was the heir; the father did not disparage his worth, nor deny his deserts. His displeasure over the rejoicing incident to the return of his wayward brother was an exhibition of illiberality and narrowness; but of the two brothers the elder was the more faithful, whatever his minor defects may have been."

In closing, on this parable, talmage remarks-

"There is no justification for the inference that a repentant sinner is to be given precedence over a righteous soul who had resisted sin; were such the way of God, then Christ, the one sinless Man, would be surpassed in the Father's esteem by regenerate offenders."

I am wondering how others interpret this parable-especially others not of the LDS faith.

Please share your thoughts...

:P

This is also my favorite parable and I have a vested interest in understanding it correctly since I have been in a far country wasting my inheritence on rioutous living...I have studied this parable in depth for 15 years and I will comment on it in another post once I collect my thoughts, but I first want to comment on brother Talmages statement and tell you what I think HE IS NOT SAYING: He is not saying that the sons are not equal...he is saying the repentant son is not above the righteous one...The returing prodicals station as an heir is clearly restored, his station above that of the servants of the household is also established...His reward is not greater than the faithful son, but it is not less either...To believe otherwise is to deny that the atonement removes every blemish..."...Thou your sins be as scarlet...they shall be white as snow..."

Share this post


Link to post

Joseph Smith has some fascinating commentary on the parable that we seldom here. It's in the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He shows that we really want to be the "bad" son and not the "good" one. The good one is the pharisee.

I do not accept Spencer W. Kimball's interpretation in the least.

Share this post


Link to post
In reference to the prodigal son, I said it was a subject I had never dwelt upon; that it was understood by many to be one of the intricate subjects of the scriptures; and even the Elders of this Church have preached largely upon it, without having any rule of interpretation. What is the rule of interpretation? Just no interpretation at all. Understand it precisely as it reads. I have a key by which I understand the scriptures. I enquire, what was the question which drew out the answer, or caused Jesus to utter the parable? It is not national; it does not refer to Abraham, Israel or the Gentiles, in a national capacity, as some suppose. To ascertain its meaning, we must dig up the root and ascertain what it was that drew the saying out of Jesus. While Jesus was teaching the people, all the publicans and sinners drew near to hear Him; "and the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying: This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them." This is the keyword which unlocks the parable of the prodigal son. It was given to answer the murmurings and questions of the Sadducees and Pharisees, who were querying, finding fault, and saying, "How is it that this man as great as He pretends to be, eats with publicans and sinners?" Jesus was not put to it so, but He could have found something to illustrate His subject, if He had designed it for a nation or nations; but He did not. It was for men in an individual capacity; and all straining on this point is a bubble. "This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them." And he spake this parable unto themâ??"What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them doth not leave the ninety-and-nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbors, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety-and-nine just persons which need no repentance." The hundred sheep represent one hundred Sadducees and Pharisees, as though Jesus had said, "If you Sadducees and Pharisees are in the sheepfold, I have no mission for you; I am sent to look up sheep that are lost; and when I have found them, I will back them up and make joy in heaven." This represents hunting after a few individuals, or one poor publican, which the Pharisees and Sadducees despised. He also gave them the parable of the woman and her ten pieces of silver, and how she lost one, and searching diligently, found it again, which gave more joy among the friends and neighbors than the nine which were not lost; like I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety-and-nine just persons that are so righteous; they will be damned anyhow; you cannot save them. (Jan. 29, 1843.)

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×