October 26, 2009
The Good Child
I’ve always struggled with the Parable of the Prodigal Son…probably because I can identify with the older son. Between my sister and myself, I’m the good child. Recently I’ve been reading a book on this parable and I don’t like what I’m reading. The author is saying there’s not much difference between the older son and the younger son. Ouch! 1) When the younger son wanted to leave, the older son should have stepped forward to be the ‘mediator’, the go-between for the father and the younger son. From the Middle East perspective, the family and the community demand that the older son be the ‘reconciler’. By staying silent he shows that for some reason, he does not want reconciliation to take place…neither for the sake of his brother, nor for the sake of his father. 2) The older brother may have been part of the reason for the younger brother wanted to leave. Because the older brother was entitled to the lion’s share of the inheritance, it’s possible that he was arrogant and unbearable. 3) If the older brother tried but couldn’t accomplish reconciliation, at the very least he should have told his brother he would say prayers on his behalf and for him to have a safe journey and hurry back. So much for being proud of being the good child…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Gail;
-----I am not so sure you should feel well spanked by this parable. One of the many things that sets the Bible far off from other writings is its penchant for keeping to the point. Jesus was excellent at stating His parables simply enough to avoid muddying the message, yet with sufficient detail to clarify His point. As Jesus told the story, “...and the younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of property that falls to me.’ And he divided his living between them.” (Luke 15:12) If the author of the book you are reading is sure that the older brother made no attempt to mediate between their father and the younger brother, then he must also be sure that the father divided his wealth without resistance. For Jesus stated nothing whatsoever about any debate between the interested parties. Any efforts made to change the younger brother’s mind, the negotiations encountered in dividing the property, and the amount of time it may have taken to reach an agreement were all outside the scope of the parable, so no mention was made of these.
-----This book you are reading may be making some good points about godly relationships and responsibilities, but it is ascribing to the Word something that is not certainly in the Word. It is just as reasonable to assume both the older brother and the father spent much time trying to change the younger brother’s mind. As much could be written in another book about how the older brother helped his father cope with this loosing effort and equitably accepted the division of some of his father’s property to the younger brother. A hundred other books could be written about principles found in a hundred other assumable situations that may be in the silence between the younger brother’s request and the actual property division. I do not mean to blatantly besmirch the book, but if I had picked it up to read I would have put it down just as quickly.
-----Of course, the older brother did exhibit jealousy when he learned of the party thrown in celebration of the younger brother’s return. But as much as the Word may be speaking of the older brother’s possible bad character, it may be just as much speaking of the inevitable flaws of a man with great character. For even at this juncture of the parable, the point being made is about the father’s heart having perpetually held a preparation and longing to forgive and once again receive his son. It is not about the wickedness of the older brother. That the older brother had not held in his heart the same condition as his father’s is no more meant to degrade into rottenness the rest of his character than it is meant to degrade into the same the characters of Jesus’ listeners for their need to hear the parable. The older brother’s failure to understand the nature of the celebration simply juxtaposes an unforgiving attitude over a forgiving one, while making it obvious that no amount of obedience fills the hole left by an unforgiving attitude. Again, the parable is completely silent as to the older brother’s response to his father’s wise and gentle rebuke.
-----If I were to write a book about what has been left silent in this parable, my book would not be about how good or bad any of the three parties’ characters might be. It would rather be about what can be understood about the reader’s own heart according to what it might see in that reflective silence.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Steve,
The book is ‘The Cross and the Prodigal’, by Kenneth E. Bailey and is a look at Luke 15 through the eyes of Middle Eastern Peasants. Dr. Bailey is an author and lecturer in Middle Eastern New Testament studies. He has spent 40 years living and teaching in the Middle East. Mr. Bailey laid very convincing ground work, which because of the length (and copyright!) I obviously can’t restate in the blog. Because he knows the Middle East mind set, he put forth some very compelling arguments and thoughts. Like any commentator, some of what he states is simply putting the parable in context, but I don’t think he is adding to Scripture. I found a lot of Ah-Ha’s that I’ll share in the next couple of days…simply because they made me look at this parable with different eyes. My excerpted blog thoughts really can’t and don’t do the book justice. I think if you picked this book up, you wouldn’t put it down so quickly. Bill is reading it now…so if I’ve overlooked any red flags, he’s sure to let me know!
Gail
Gail;
-----Thank you. There is probably more that can be read into the parable from its cultural context. But human nature is the broader culture of which all other cultures are merely subsets. Obedience and rebellion, arrogance and humility, and forgiveness and spite are dichotomies of that broader culture, and they happen across cultural lines. How much or little the older brother attempted to perform his cultural responsibilities is simply not indicated in the parable. What is indicated is that the younger brother failed in his responsibilities, and the older brother reacted with spite upon the younger brother’s return. But now you have piqued my curiosity about this book. From your confident testimony, I am tempted to buy it and learn what I a might be missing.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment