Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The parable of the Prodigal Son


Recommended Posts

Quote

I think the prodigal's long journey home represents the full repentance process.

God might be anxious to get us back.  But for those that don't qualify for the resurrection of the just, there's a still a 1000 year waiting period before they too can be resurrected.  Is that a part of the repentance process or is it a penalty for not being valiant enough?  

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

God might be anxious to get us back.  But for those that don't qualify for the resurrection of the just, there's a still a 1000 year waiting period before they too can be resurrected.  Is that a part of the repentance process or is it a penalty for not being valiant enough?  

My understanding is that it is what happens when we won't accept Christ's suffering on our behalf and so have to suffer that pain ourselves.  I think an argument could be made that such suffering might also lead someone towards repentance and through that process as well.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

My understanding is that it is what happens when we won't accept Christ's suffering on our behalf and so have to suffer that pain ourselves.  I think an argument could be made that such suffering might also lead someone towards repentance and through that process as well.

What percentage of people would you predict to rise in the 1st resurrection?  

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

What percentage of people would you predict to rise in the 1st resurrection?  

I have no predictions on that. The scriptures suggest that it is “few” compared to the overall numbers, but how that works out percentage wise I have no guesses.

I have heard people in leadership teach that God‘s plan is perfect, and as such He will save most of His children. I don’t know though if that means that most of His children will be exalted. Taking into account what the scripture say I would guess that it does not mean that.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Eschaton said:

I don't believe there was such a thing as taking early inheritance, so I don't know that following closely the technicalities of inheritance laws is the point.

No fairy tales of younger sons going off to seek their fortune with their portion from that time period?  I would have thought that was a consistent fantasy that was occasionally reality throughout history, even if unlikely in cultures where family was all, but there might be laws in a society that saw the need to keep estates intact as much as possible.  The more wealth, the easier to get through bad times.  It would also keep a cheaper work force (family) tied to the estate.

The Jacob and Esau pottage story made me think that inheritance might be viewed more of a commodity and thus could be traded or received early, but that could be a massive jump.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
57 minutes ago, Calm said:

No fairy tales of younger sons going off to seek their fortune with their portion from that time period?  I would have thought that was a consistent fantasy that was occasionally reality throughout history, even if unlikely in cultures where family was all, but there might be laws in a society that saw the need to keep estates intact as much as possible.  The more wealth, the easier to get through bad times.  It would also keep a cheaper work force (family) tied to the estate.

The Jacob and Esau pottage story made me think that inheritance might be viewed more of a commodity and thus could be traded or received early, but that could be a massive jump.

Could be something there. 

Link to comment

Found my paper on this. A sheet of paper I had to retype on here... Using a portable device... Enjoy.

Parables were teachings for initiates, not common people, so "without a parable he spake not unto them" (Mk 4:34). It appeared to be just a story to hide its true meaning, so "by seeing they see not" (Mt 13.13-15; Mk 4:12; Lk 8:10). As a Melchizedek High Priest, Christ was charged with keeping temple secrets, and could only divulge them to those similarly initiated into the priesthood themselves. They should understand parable themes of death, death is a theme in the initiations (initiation is from the Latin for: the deaths). The priesthood initiation is the method by which mortals prepared themselves to meet God, there were certain things they are to expect in the hereafter, or as well as information of the future or past. Sometimes an exposition about the temple rites themselves, such as the parable of the Prodigal Son.

All Christians, whether they know it or not, are aspiring to be royal Melchizedek priests, and the royal road is like the Prodigal Son. The Prodigal Son goes on a "journey into a far country" (Lk 15:13). The Father's house is heaven, and this is the spirit's decent to earth. An angel son left his first estate, out of his Father's sight. He wasted his inheritance, his temporal and spiritual blessings and gifts on "riotous living" (Lk 15:13). Then came a "mighty famine" (Lk 15:14). A figure of ignorance, the deprivation of the truth (Amos 8:11) a stage of everyone's life, a necessary prelude to finding the truth, it leads us to hunger and search for truth (Mt 5:6). So, "he began to be in want" (Lk 15:15) and the search for truth began.

He becomes hired to by an earthly figure to feed swine (Lk 15:15), a low for a Jew, swine represent the heathen Gentiles and all that is unclean, (Prov 11:22; Isa 66:3; 2 Pt 2:22), so to serve them must be humbling, to feed them husks while he is famished. He begins to eat the husks. The swine feed on husks and crusts of men, things hard to eat and ingest, it is hard to be nourished, or receive truth from it. The husks of the world is not just worldly knowledge, but even a Bible passage can be a hard to eat husk of truth. You might be thinking, did I just call the Bible a hard to eat husk? While it was written by inspired people, those people are long dead, and the books don't speak for themselves without modern inspiration to interpret it. There is no private interpretation (2 Pt 1:20). People are struggling everyday to feed themselves with it and no matter how thoroughly they study it, they interpret it wrong. The wide diversity of interpretation among Bible-only churches testifies the Bible is not so easy to eat or decipher. 

Until it finally occurs to the Prodigal Son, as it does to us, that he doesn't actually have to eat husks. His Father gives substantive meals to even to his lowest servants. Husks are lesser teachings, first principle commonly spoken of and written about, while his Father's food are higher teachings feed to only the mature (Heb 5:11-6:2), the mysteries directly from God and are unwritten (2 Cor 12:4), deep doctrines kept secret, things told only in parables (Mt 13:35). These are the things the Prodigal Son desires, he has matured, he has outgrown husks, he had renounced his old life, "no man gave unto him", and the husks of men do not satisfy (Lk 15:16).

The parable of the Prodigal Son is how we may return from their fallen state on earth and be welcomed back into the Kingdom of God. Humbly return to be a servant, a priest prepares to meet God. In Revelations, the Christians aspire to be like the ancient priest-kings (Rev 1:6), who seek heavenly food (Rev 2:17), that become endowed with a robe (Rev 3:18). Notice the symbolism on initiatory acts hidden in the rest of the parable. He resolves to "arise and go to my father" (Lk 15:20), an ascent to God, to his "house" (Lk 20:25), the temple or heavenly temple. The Father runs and meets his son with a kiss (Lk 15:20). This is a familial, fraternal "holy kiss" in the Early Church (1 Cor 16:20) the spiritual transference of the Spirit of Life by a kiss is an ancient rite (Gen 2:7; Jn 20:22; Odes of Solomon 28:6; Joseph and Aseneth 19:11), you impart the spirit from one who possesses it (Jubilees 25:13). The rush to his son is the descent of grace, an embrace, after the manner of the ritual embrace of the Davidic King (1 Kg 17:21-22; 2 Kg 4:34-35), like Jacob's embrace was initiatory. He embraced God, as the sun rose, he receives a new royal name "Israel [H3478, he who embraces God]". (Gen 32:24). The rituals represent a pre-enactment of certain expectations of the afterlife. Hebrews believed in the resurrection God will "embrace them and kiss them" (Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 9:125 n124). 

The Prodigal Son confesses to him, as being "no more worthy to be called thy son" (Lk 15:21). Is also initiatory, an expression of contrition in mystery rituals. Paul uses many initiatory phases, and it seems to imply he was initiated in Eleusina by his words, "For I am the least of the apostles, that I am not meet to be called an apostle, because I have persecuted the Church of God (1 Cor 15:9) and repeated in Ephesians (Eph 3:8). See while the flesh was tainted, the spirit is pure, so the flesh must also become purified. Christians took part in these rituals in which they die and are raised up (Rom 6:4; Col 12:12), they are buried and reborn in water, quickened by the Holy Spirit to new life (Jn 3:3) and clothed with the robe of resurrection. 

The Prodigal Son received the "best [G4413, chief, best, first, whole, seamless] robe" a description of priestly robes. Christ became endowed to meet the Father on the Mount of Transfiguration with a High Priest's robe, "white" (Mt 17:2) representing light and purity, expensive and seamless (Jn 19:23-24). Joshua the High Priest had to change his robes to approach the Lord (Zech 3:3), or the symbolic imagery off Bartimomaeus who had to remove his old clothes to approach Christ whom then restored the sight to he that was blind (Mk 10:50) The "garment of salvation" (Isa 61:10), symbolizes your spirit's new resurrected body, as the body is the clothes of the spirit, "our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven" (2 Cor 5:1-2). Casting of our former cloths, our tainted body, "cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light" (Rom 13:12). The ancient priest's robe was like armor as it shielded to priest from deadly "glory" (Eze 42:12; 44:19). Born again, the "little ones" that believe (Mt 18:6) only those who become "as a little child" will see the kingdom (Mk 10:15).

The Father, "puts a ring on his hand" (Lk 15:22). A ring as a circle represents eternity and the power to encompass or bind. The ancient royal kings were given a ring as an icon of a primitive compass, a measuring coil, used to describes God's power over the sea (Prov 8:27; Job 26:10) a power he gives to the king (Psalm 89:25-27). Royal rings also had a family seal, a sign of office (Gen 41:42) which can be stamped onto clay or wax sealing a letter shut , and wearing it is a signet authorized the owner of the seal to act under their authority, and even sign letters in the king's name (1 Kg 21:8). As a priest is authorized to act in God's name.

The Father, "puts shoes on his feet" (Lk 15:22).  The final piece of priest's regalia. It signifies the rite is complete. The purification ritual also ends at the feet, once the feet are washed the ritual washing is complete. Like when Christ washed the disciple's feet (Jn 13:1-15). Shoes represent the power to move forward, eternal progression. A priest's soft leather shoes were bound to him by a ministering priest, as to not contaminate the holy ground with common or cursed ground (Gen 3:17), which are on your old shoes (Ex 3:5; Act 2:33). The Christians were "shod" with the "armor of God". (Eph 6:15, 11) which is a "mystery [musteron, G3466, the initiation into secret rites] of the gospel" (Eph 6:19). 

A "fatted calf" is offered to the son (Lk 15:23). Cows have lot of divine qualities, symbolizing fertility and abundance as they produce both milk and meat, it can symbolize the spiritual milk and meat (1 Cor 3:1-2;10:2-4) that he was starving for. The flour, honey and oil (Ezek 16:13, 19) are also offering foods for the temple (Lev 2:4-6; 2 Chr 31:5), holy communion, or even a wedding feast  (Gen 29:22, Jug 14:10; Est 2:18; Jn 2:1-11) like the "marriage feast of the lamb" as it does in other parables (Rev 19:9; Lk 14:15-24; 22:29-30). When the Davidic King was initiated in the king making ritual (Dt 31:9; Neh 8.) was also after the manner of the Prodigal Son, to make expiation/atonement for the land (Dt 32:43; Psa 72).  When he became a priest after Melchizedek (Psa 110:4) he was given a rod and ring (Psa 110:1) reborn and vested (Psa 110:3; LXX, Psa 109:3; Psa 2:6-7) and drank libations from a sacramental cup (Psa 110:7). The king making ritual concluded with a royal marriage (Psa 45). 

If there was any doubt of the transcendent nature the parable, the Father says, "My son was dead and is alive again, he was lost and is found". If the Prodigal Son is every sojourning spirit's mortal life, the Father is God, and the Father's house is heaven, then who is the Elder Brother? Then the "Elder" brother enters the "house" (Lk 15:25), he is a first born, an angelic figure who never left heaven (or a priestly figure who never left the temple), never having dared to venture into the world to be tempted. You could say he is a Satanic figure, an accusing angel, like the one that spoke out against the loyalty of Job (Job 1:6) the purity of Joshua the High Priest (Zech 3:11). These angels don't understand fallen beings, they've never lost their connection with God. They judge mortals for their impurity in their tunnel vision or delusion of their own perfect state. Vexed by why the Father would allow such unworthy sons back into his presence. The Prodigal Son's journey was a testing, his fall was necessary for his personal growth. Though he isn't in pristine shape, his flesh became tainted, his confession of guilt demonstrates that his spirit became pure (2 Pt 4:6), it's a much simpler matter to fix and purify the outer flesh, like Job and Joshua, than to fix a flawed character within. And in exchange the Father received a more worthy, humble and grateful son than the one that had left. He replies to the Elder son, "Thou art ever with me, all I have is thine" (Lk 15:31) he is still one with God (Jn 10:30), and it doesn't diminish what is his. He should be glad his brother is "alive again" (Lk 15:32). I say this is the initiatory path, though in some minds this is a just a simple story.

Edited by Pyreaux
Link to comment
12 hours ago, mbh26 said:

I was kind of dying to ask this question in Sunday School but held my tongue.  I admit I didn't like this parable much at first, especially being the older son in my family.  I can understand that life isn't a competition.  But I've also had a younger sibling take everything with riotous living that my father's family had saved for generations and basically cut the other three of us out of any inheritance in this life.  

So what is the Lord trying to teach us in this parable?  I suppose in Heaven substance and things don't matter anymore since we would inherit all that Heavenly Father has and whatever Jesus spends on another sinners inheritance, I would still get the same reward.  But my question is about forgiveness.  If I were to spend my family savings on harlots, I would not be forgiven and welcomed back into church right away.  I would have seek to pay back and make restitution for my sins.  Only after years of repentance and cleansing would I even be allowed to reenter into my baptismal covenant.  Is this a contradiction in what and when God is willing to forgive?  

My wife and I have been under similar circumstances. I guarantee you your sibling will be embarrassed and ashamed at the Gathering of all of your relatives in the next life.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Does it really matter? We are all the older son at some points in our lives, and we are all the younger son as well. I see one of the major points of the story being that we should worry about our own journey more and our brother’s less. God will judge us all with perfection. ❤️

My concern is that God can seem very loving and forgiving in some instances and very demanding and heavy handed in others.  So what is God like? I'm not personally in the scriptures so most of what I learn about God comes from how He interacts with other people.  

Link to comment

Misreading Scripture With Western Eyes talks about The Prodigal Son.  There idea is not to state what things mean, but to encourage us to look at it from another cultural context and see if there are things we are missing.

"Mark Allan Powell offers an excellent example of this phenomenon in “The Forgotten Famine,” an exploration of the theme of personal responsibility in what we call the parable of the prodigal son.[4] Powell had twelve students in a seminary class read the story carefully from Luke’s Gospel, close their Bibles and then retell the story as faithfully as possible to a partner. None of the twelve American seminary students mentioned the famine in Luke 15:14, which precipitates the son’s eventual return...

"Later, Powell had the opportunity to try the experiment again, this time outside the United States. In St. Petersburg, Russia, he gathered fifty participants to read and retell the prodigal son story. This time an overwhelming forty-two of the fifty participants mentioned the famine. Why? Just seventy years before, 670,000 people had died of starvation after a Nazi German siege of the capital city began a three-year famine. Famine was very much a part of the history and imagination of the Russian participants in Powell’s exercise. Based solely on cultural location, people from America and Russia disagreed about what they considered the crucial details of the story. Americans tend to treat the mention of the famine as an unnecessary plot device. Sure, we think: the famine makes matters worse for the young son. He’s already penniless, and now there’s no food to buy even if he did have money. But he has already committed his sin, so it goes without being said for us that the main issue in the story is his wastefulness, not the famine. This is evident from our traditional title for the story: the parable of the prodigal (“wasteful”) son. We apply the story, then, as a lesson about willful rebellion and repentance. The boy is guilty, morally, of disrespecting his father and squandering his inheritance. He must now ask for forgiveness.

"Christians in other parts of the world understand the story differently.[5] In cultures more familiar with famine, like Russia, readers consider the boy’s spending less important than the famine. The application of the story has less to do with willful rebellion and more to do with God’s faithfulness to deliver his people from hopeless situations. The boy’s problem is not that he is wasteful but that he is lost. "

Link to comment
1 hour ago, katherine the great said:

Good question. I think the best example of what God is like is Jesus. I like to study the four gospels, and I think that’s where we can get the best information about who Jesus was and what He stood for. 

Adding in Third Nephi might be useful as well.  There is not a lot of material, so use what we have.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Rain said:

Misreading Scripture With Western Eyes talks about The Prodigal Son.  There idea is not to state what things mean, but to encourage us to look at it from another cultural context and see if there are things we are missing.

"Mark Allan Powell offers an excellent example of this phenomenon in “The Forgotten Famine,” an exploration of the theme of personal responsibility in what we call the parable of the prodigal son.[4] Powell had twelve students in a seminary class read the story carefully from Luke’s Gospel, close their Bibles and then retell the story as faithfully as possible to a partner. None of the twelve American seminary students mentioned the famine in Luke 15:14, which precipitates the son’s eventual return...

"Later, Powell had the opportunity to try the experiment again, this time outside the United States. In St. Petersburg, Russia, he gathered fifty participants to read and retell the prodigal son story. This time an overwhelming forty-two of the fifty participants mentioned the famine. Why? Just seventy years before, 670,000 people had died of starvation after a Nazi German siege of the capital city began a three-year famine. Famine was very much a part of the history and imagination of the Russian participants in Powell’s exercise. Based solely on cultural location, people from America and Russia disagreed about what they considered the crucial details of the story. Americans tend to treat the mention of the famine as an unnecessary plot device. Sure, we think: the famine makes matters worse for the young son. He’s already penniless, and now there’s no food to buy even if he did have money. But he has already committed his sin, so it goes without being said for us that the main issue in the story is his wastefulness, not the famine. This is evident from our traditional title for the story: the parable of the prodigal (“wasteful”) son. We apply the story, then, as a lesson about willful rebellion and repentance. The boy is guilty, morally, of disrespecting his father and squandering his inheritance. He must now ask for forgiveness.

"Christians in other parts of the world understand the story differently.[5] In cultures more familiar with famine, like Russia, readers consider the boy’s spending less important than the famine. The application of the story has less to do with willful rebellion and more to do with God’s faithfulness to deliver his people from hopeless situations. The boy’s problem is not that he is wasteful but that he is lost. "

I’ve been in a lesson or two where the teacher has made this point about the famine and I always forget about it. But it’s a good point. 

Link to comment
11 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Good question. I think the best example of what God is like is Jesus. I like to study the four gospels, and I think that’s where we can get the best information about who Jesus was and what He stood for. 

Do you believe that Jesus Christ is Jehovah of the Old Testament?  Do you ever have trouble reconciling the two?  

Link to comment
2 hours ago, mbh26 said:

Do you believe that Jesus Christ is Jehovah of the Old Testament?  Do you ever have trouble reconciling the two?  

I certainly do.  See, for example this essay:

https://www.theway.org.uk/back/431Barker.pdf

Which is a preview of the more extended argument here:

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Publications/GreatAngel.htm

Which is also what the Book of Mormon makes plain.

Quote

Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world. (3 Nephi 11:14)

Behold, I AM he that gave the law, and I AM he who covenanted with my people Israel; therefore, the law in me is fulfilled, for I have come to fulfil the law; therefore it hath an end. (3 Nephi 15:5)

As far as reconciliation (which, interestingly enough, is one of the meanings Nibley puts to the New Testament word for At-one-ment)

Quote

16 ¶ Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;

17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

19 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:

20 But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it. (Isaiah 1:16-20)

It's very easy to reconcile that picture with the preaching of Jesus in the New Testament.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Link to comment
5 hours ago, mbh26 said:

Do you believe that Jesus Christ is Jehovah of the Old Testament? 

Yes and no. He may have been Jehovah, but the interpretation of Him as filtered through ancient Israelite culture/worldview does not ring true to me. I think many atrocities were credited to Jehovah, that really were just cultural practices of the people.
 

5 hours ago, mbh26 said:

Do you ever have trouble reconciling the two?  

Not at all. 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Yes and no. He may have been Jehovah, but the interpretation of Him as filtered through ancient Israelite culture/worldview does not ring true to me. I think many atrocities were credited to Jehovah, that really were just cultural practices of the people.
 

Not at all. 

By interpretation of Him as filtered through the ancient Israelite worldview, do you mean the Old Testament or 10 commandments?

Don't the 10 commandments say adulterers and Sabbath breakers should be put to death?  Do you think Moses didn't quite get the 10 commandments the way Jehovah said?  A commandment to execute adulterers sure seems different than, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

 

Link to comment
On 5/8/2023 at 3:11 PM, mbh26 said:

I was kind of dying to ask this question in Sunday School but held my tongue.  I admit I didn't like this parable much at first, especially being the older son in my family.  I can understand that life isn't a competition.  But I've also had a younger sibling take everything with riotous living that my father's family had saved for generations and basically cut the other three of us out of any inheritance in this life.  

So what is the Lord trying to teach us in this parable?  I suppose in Heaven substance and things don't matter anymore since we would inherit all that Heavenly Father has and whatever Jesus spends on another sinners inheritance, I would still get the same reward.  But my question is about forgiveness.  If I were to spend my family savings on harlots, I would not be forgiven and welcomed back into church right away.  I would have seek to pay back and make restitution for my sins.  Only after years of repentance and cleansing would I even be allowed to reenter into my baptismal covenant.  Is this a contradiction in what and when God is willing to forgive?  

This is really interesting. This parable for me is perhaps my favorite, because of what it teaches us about God. Some years ago I was at a seminar which discussed this parable and the speaker told us of an ancient Jewish custom. Apparently if a son dishonored his father he would be cast out of his father's house and the villagers would cast him out of the village, kicking his belongings out after him. He could never return, there could be no forgiveness. The speaker said that this was a well known tradition in Judaism, therefore he assumed that the Lord would be aware of it, which would make this parable rather shocking to its hearers, because He turned their thinking upside down. The father in the parable,who Christ is showing, has being dreadfully wronged by his son who, by asking for his inheritance, is wishing him dead. This is almost a crime against the commandment to honour your Father and mother. However, Christ is also showing what God is like, and how different He is to His creatures. He shows us that the father sees his prodigal son approaching from a distance and he knows him immediately, it's almost as if he has been watching for him. In response, this venerable man hoiks up his garments and belts cross the field to grab hold of his filthy, probably smelly son, and embraces him. He wraps him in forgiveness despite how grosse he looks due the covering of grime all over him. The son is repentant and willing to live as his father's servant, but the father restores him to his former status. The father cleans him and puts clean garments on him, and a ring on his finger, and orders a feast because he who was dead has returned to life. 

This shows the depth of God's love, mercy and forgiveness and the cleansing work that He performs through the Holy Spirit in us in order for us once again to become his children. If we humble ourselves and repent and hand our lives over to Him, then He in His infinite goodness responds in love. For me this parable is the most encouraging and hopeful for Christians because Christ Himself is demonstrating Who God is, Who He is and that He stands at the door knocking, waiting for our response so that He can heal us, and being the Author and Finisher of our faith, save us. 

 

Edited by Orthodox Christian
Link to comment
5 hours ago, Orthodox Christian said:

This is really interesting. This parable for me is perhaps my favorite, because of what it teaches us about God. Some years ago I was at a seminar which discussed this parable and the speaker told us of an ancient Jewish custom. Apparently if a son dishonored his father he would be cast out of his father's house and the villagers would cast him out of the village, kicking his belongings out after him. He could never return, there could be no forgiveness. The speaker said that this was a well known tradition in Judaism, therefore he assumed that the Lord would be aware of it, which would make this parable rather shocking to its hearers, because He turned their thinking upside down. The father in the parable,who Christ is showing, has being dreadfully wronged by his son who, by asking for his inheritance, is wishing him dead. This is almost a crime against the commandment to honour your Father and mother. However, Christ is also showing what God is like, and how different He is to His creatures. He shows us that the father sees his prodigal son approaching from a distance and he knows him immediately, it's almost as if he has been watching for him. In response, this venerable man hoiks up his garments and belts cross the field to grab hold of his filthy, probably smelly son, and embraces him. He wraps him in forgiveness despite how grosse he looks due the covering of grime all over him. The son is repentant and willing to live as his father's servant, but the father restores him to his former status. The father cleans him and puts clean garments on him, and a ring on his fingers, and orders a feast because he who was dead has returned to life. 

This shows the depth of God's love, mercy and forgiveness and the cleansing work that He performs through the Holy Spirit in us in order for us once again to become his children. If we humble yourselves and repent and hand our lives over to Him, then He in His infinite goodness responds in love. For me this parable is the most encouraging and hopeful for Christians because Christ Himself is demonstrating Who God is, Who He is and that He stands at the door knocking, waiting for our response so that He can heal us, and being the Author and Finisher of our faith, save us. 

 

Not saying what I was thinking is true at all, but I was surprised at the thoughts I had flitting in my head as I read your post. First I thought of Jesus leaving God's house.  Certainly not riotous living, but mortal living, and the power of restoring him back.  

Then I thought of there being 2 sons in the story and Lucifer being the younger son. 

It would be interesting to know if either of those things go into it.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, mbh26 said:

Don't the 10 commandments say adulterers and Sabbath breakers should be put to death?

No, the ten commandments doesn't say that.  You're conflating the ten commandments with the Law of Moses.

Edited by ksfisher
Link to comment
4 hours ago, ksfisher said:

No, the ten commandments doesn't say that.  You're conflating the ten commandments with the Law of Moses

Perhaps I'm wrong but what difference does it make?  Jehovah still gave a law through Moses, his prophet, to execute sabbath breakers and adulterers.  How do you reconcile that with Jesus who halted the stoning of an adulteress?

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...