November 06, 2009
Merely Obeying
I’m still wrestling with the Parable of the Prodigal Son because of a book titled The Cross and the Prodigal – Luke 15 Through the Eyes of Middle Eastern Peasants, by Kenneth E. Bailey. The author maintains there are two types of sin shown in the parable. “One is the sin of the law-breaker and the other is the sin of the law-keeper.” In my legalistic mind I know that no one is capable of fully keeping the law, but I’m not ready to hear that there can be sin in attempting to keep the law. For me, keeping God’s commands is an act of obedience and Jesus said if you love me you will obey my commands. Translation: I’m showing love to the Lord when I obediently keep the His commands and sin is just not part of the equation. Mr. Bailey thinks otherwise, “Each son returns to the father either defining (the older son) or intending to define (the prodigal) his relationship to the father as that of a servant before a master. The father will not accept this definition. He offers costly love to each, out of his determination to have sons responding to love rather than merely servants obeying commands.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----May I suggest that you are really wrestling with “The Cross and the Prodigal - Luke 15 Through the Eyes of Middle Eastern Peasants,” more than you are wrestling with the Parable of the Prodigal Son. Jeremiah wrote, “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord, I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. And no longer shall each man teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” (Jer 31:31-34) Notice how individually God has chosen to relate to us. This individual relationship is certainly not according to the contemporary perception of individual reality, which is a myth. It is still according to the Word and the truth, but since our vulnerability to err continues as we are left to live our temporal lives in this twisted world, what we each understand of Him and His Word is subject to error. None of us are yet perfect, so none of us understands His Word with crystal clarity. God’s forgiveness of my iniquities and failures does not necessarily eliminate the effects my flaws have upon my perception of His Word, nor is this different in the lives of any others. All our perceptions are fuzzied by our own shortcomings, so His relationship with each of us must mercifully tolerate each of our own perceptual distortions until He can clear them for us. Paul verifies this condition of spiritual life in Romans 14:5, “Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind,” and 14:22, “The faith that you have keep between yourself and God.” So Kenneth E. Bailey can not entirely teach you clearly since his perception is personalized by his fuzziness, and yours is by yours.
-----But that does not mean what Bro. Bailey writes is without value. I commented a few days ago that Bro. Bailey draws more from the parable than is in it. He certainly has more knowledge about the cultural elements of the story’s setting, and that knowledge supplies many insights according to a variety of possible assumptions about the story. But to determine any particular assumption was indeed an included element of the parable is for Bro. Bailey to do for himself, rather than for us, when other assumptions are possible. Only the parable itself is certain in as far as its details extend; Bro. Bailey simply offers additional possibilities useful for each of us to trim up our own understanding, but not useful to replace our understanding.
-----I’ve read no more of Mr. Bailey’s book than you’ve quoted, and maybe I err in viewing his work through my own perceptions, but it appears to me that he is writing of this very thing, this fuzziness. The prodigal has no more to know God and His law in than his own mind as far as it is constructed to the day. So he must attempt to define that law by the best he is able to understand the Word. Since the mind is humanly flawed, so will be the understanding. Therefore the importance of sincerity rests not so much upon the flawlessness of the final perception as it does upon the intention to perceive flawlessly. This is some of the substance of the heart of David. The desire of the heart is to keep the law perfectly, but the effect of the effort will always produce some amount of failure.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment