The Prodigal Son examined

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#41
....except the produgal left the fold.
He was saved before he left.
Had a nice relationship and home with his father.
The sinner is of his father the devil.
IOW, A different father
We were all sinners. We repented, and became children of God. Like the Publicans and sinners who came to Jesus. See also last two posts
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,192
2,353
113
#43
That absolutely is a key in understanding this parable. Well said.
Despite the wickedness unbelief and hardness of heart among the Pharisees and Sadducees etc. they were still atleast on the surface God's covenant people at the time!

Just like the israelites in the OT that were called to repentance many-a-times by the prophets when they were engaging in idolatry and ba'al worship of all kinds! They were STILL God's covenant people, which is why the prophets were sent to begin with to CALL THEM back to repentance.
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#44
Despite the wickedness unbelief and hardness of heart among the Pharisees and Sadducees etc. they were still atleast on the surface God's covenant people at the time!

Just like the israelites in the OT that were called to repentance many-a-times by the prophets when they were engaging in idolatry and ba'al worship of all kinds! They were STILL God's covenant people, which is why the prophets were sent to begin with to CALL THEM back to repentance.
Excellent points. Even though Israel backslide, God still called them His Son, and in Hosea, Israel is even equated to as married to God. As a nation, they belonged to God, but as individuals, only the faithful were true children
 

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
2,287
444
83
#45
17 “But when he came to himself, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! 18 I will arise and go to my father, and will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you, 19 and I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Make me like one of your hired servants.”
=====

This is my favorite part of the parable. I believed a number of us, when we first accepted Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, made that decision based on "carnal reasons".

For me, I just felt that there was nothing to lose by doing so, even if what I am reading about Jesus turns out to be incorrect. You will at least be assured of being in heaven when your life ends. This is the "Pascal's wager" reasoning to be a Christian.

To find out that the Father accepted the Son, even when he had the wrong motivation to come home, was very reassuring and reminded me how great is the Father's love for us.
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
2,947
725
113
#46
We must remember that the prodigal represents the same thing that the lost sheep and lost coin represents. Someone who is lost and then found

The Jews in a relational covenant with God. The sinners had gone into a far country away from Him, and needed to be found. The Pharisees were seemingly in close proximity, but with hearts far away from the heart of God, needed to be found too. Near and far, they all were lost

The Publicans were coming to Jesus, who came to save them. The Pharisees were not. Jesus, like the Father in the parable entreating the brother to come in and join the celebration, was entreating the Pharisees that their hearts in rejecting the younger brother, Publicans and sinners, and rejecting Him, they were in effect rejecting the Father
Jesus told the leaders "you are of your father the devil"

So they were not of the heavenly father. The produgal was born into the Father. The SAME father he went back to.

You forget,it wad Jesus that preached "ye must be born again"
That right there showed he understood those born again have a different Father. Weather Jew or Greek.
You paint yourself in corner after corner under that concept of the rest of the bible to be minimized and not taken seriously
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
2,947
725
113
#47
Excellent points. Even though Israel backslide, God still called them His Son, and in Hosea, Israel is even equated to as married to God. As a nation, they belonged to God, but as individuals, only the faithful were true children
Does not work.
Play it out.
The produgal was ALREADY restored to full family inheritance BEFORE he departed.
You have to assume a Jew Returning to the law was the ultimate family restoration.
You have to assume the father of the produgal thought, erroneously, that a jew restored to Judaism is fully restored with no need to be born again ( a new creation with a new father).

That dog won't hunt.
The produgal situation ONLY FITS a christian template.

The starting place needed no modifying.
Your starting place is broken,because the Jews,all of them,needed rebirth.
 
Sep 3, 2016
3,489
309
83
#48
Can a son by birth ever not be a son by birth.....at what point was the prodigal...

a. Not a son by birth
b. Actually dead
“JESUS’ TRUE FAMILY - Matthew 12

46 While He (Christ) yet talked to the people (concerns the terrible Word He has just delivered concerning Israel’s present and future state), behold, His mother and His brethren stood without, desiring to speak with Him (Jesus was probably in a particular house, with it being filled with people, with no more room for others to come in, hence His family not able to get to Him; their desire to speak with Him was not in a positive sense).

47 Then one said unto Him, Behold, Your mother and Your brethren stand without, desiring to speak with You (they had things to say to Him, but they little desired to hear what He had to say to them; thankfully, that would change after His Death and Resurrection).

48 But He answered and said unto him who told Him, Who is My mother? and who are My brethren? (This totally refutes the claims later made by the Catholic Church.)

“49 And He stretched forth His Hand toward His Disciples (refers to the original Twelve, but is not limited to them, as it refers to any and all who follow Him, as the next Passage proclaims), and said, Behold My mother and My brethren!

50 For whosoever (increases the dimensions of His family to include all who follow Him) shall do the will of My Father which is in Heaven (proclaims the qualifications for being a part of the Family of God), the same is My brother, and sister, and mother (places no significance on physical birth, but everything on spiritual birth).”

JSM
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#49
Does not work.
Play it out.
The produgal was ALREADY restored to full family inheritance BEFORE he departed.
.
It seems to me that the Prodigal had spent his PORTION of the family inheritance. Remember? The Father gave it to him and he spent it on riotous living?

You have to assume a Jew Returning to the law was the ultimate family restoration.
Who said anything about returning to the Law? I thought the Publicans and sinners, whom the Prodigal represents were COMING TO JESUS. Yes, that is correct. The Prodigal was returning to His Father, who represents God. The Law is not God, so the Prodigal was not returning to the law, he was returning to Jesus

No one was ever saved by the Law. Salvation has ALWAYS been through faith. From Abel to the last christian who will ever live.

You have to assume the father of the produgal thought, erroneously, that a jew restored to Judaism is fully restored with no need to be born again ( a new creation with a new father).
Wow, way to miss the entire point of the parable. The parable is not about anything except a sinner being restored to God, and the fact that often religious people miss the point about grace. The Prodigal was a sinner, was he not? And he was restored to God, was he not? And how was he restored? By coming to Jesus. The Elder missed the point, did he not? The elder failed to rejoice when his brother came home, did he not? The Father entreated him to have a change of heart, did he not?

The point was, the Publicans and sinners came to Jesus and having been lost, they had been found. Nothing to do with returning to the Law. The Prodigal in the parable did not come to a law, they came to the Father. The Publicans and sinners, like the Prodigal, came to the Father through faith in Jesus.

The produgal situation ONLY FITS a christian template.
Faith in Jesus does fit the Christian template PERFECTLY.

Your starting place is broken,because the Jews,all of them,needed rebirth.
Rebirth through faith in Jesus. Did the Publicans and sinners always have faith in Jesus?

Jesus told the leaders "you are of your father the devil"
Because of their unbelief and the works that issued from their unbelief. If they had believed, they would have been saved just like the Publicans and sinners. Did you notice that in the Parable of the Prodigal Son, when the Father went out and entreated the Elder, that his response is never given? It is deliberately left open ended.

So they were not of the heavenly father.
Were the Publicans and sinners "of the heavenly father" before they came to Jesus?

The produgal was born into the Father.
When did this happen?

The SAME father he went back to.
When believed on Jesus and they went to Jesus, they were returning to the Father, correct?

You forget,it wad Jesus that preached "ye must be born again"
Yes, those who are born again are those who come to Jesus.

That right there showed he understood those born again have a different Father. Weather Jew or Greek.
By your logic, a person who is born again can be lost and be found again and die and live again and be found again. Is that what you are arguing for? After all, the Father described the Prodigal as lost and dead. Are born again people lost and dead?

You paint yourself in corner after corner under that concept of the rest of the bible to be minimized and not taken seriously
No one minimalizes or fails to take the whole Bible seriously but those who reject the finished work of Christ by saying that He failed to fulfill the Law. What part of the Bible am I minimalizing?
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#50
Addendum to last post to absolutely

As far as sons, the same principle is used in another parable.

Matthew 21:
28 “But what do you think? A man had
two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’ 29 He answered and said, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he regretted it and went. 30 Then he came to the second and said likewise. And he answered and said, ‘I go, sir,’ but he did not go. 31 Which of the two did the will of his father?”

They said to Him, “The first.”

Jesus said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you. 32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward[f]relent and believe him.

QUESTION- WAS THE ONE WHO FAILED TO DO THE WILL OF HIS FATHER BORN AGAIN? I SAY NO! What was the will of the Father? To enter into the kingdom through faith in Christ. The first son, the publicans and harlots entered in. The second son, the people Jesus was speaking to, the religious leaders did not.

See? The ones who did not believe were likened unto sons along with the ones who did believe.

One of the rules of interpreting parables is not to read too much into the several parts, but to glean the overarching MAIN POINT of the parable. To ignore the rules of exegesis is neither wise nor safe.

It is important to let scripture, not our traditions, interpret scripture...
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#51
Addendum to last post to absolutely

As far as sons, the same principle is used in another parable.

Matthew 21:
28 “But what do you think? A man had
two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’ 29 He answered and said, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he regretted it and went. 30 Then he came to the second and said likewise. And he answered and said, ‘I go, sir,’ but he did not go. 31 Which of the two did the will of his father?”

They said to Him, “The first.”

Jesus said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you. 32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward[f]relent and believe him.

QUESTION- WAS THE ONE WHO FAILED TO DO THE WILL OF HIS FATHER BORN AGAIN? I SAY NO! What was the will of the Father? To enter into the kingdom through faith in Christ. The first son, the publicans and harlots entered in. The second son, the people Jesus was speaking to, the religious leaders did not.

See? The ones who did not believe were likened unto sons along with the ones who did believe.

One of the rules of interpreting parables is not to read too much into the several parts, but to glean the overarching MAIN POINT of the parable. To ignore the rules of exegesis is neither wise nor safe.

It is important to let scripture, not our traditions, interpret scripture...
The two sons in the parable of Matthew 21:28-32 represent the same people as the two sons in the parable of the prodigal son. One represents publicans and sinners and the other represents the religious leaders/scribes and Pharisees. This answers the chief objection to the view set forth here, that the scribes and pharisees were not sons. But Jesus uses the figure of son here in Matthew 21 in reference to them (scribes and Pharisees).

He is not saying they are sons by new birth in either parable, it is just one of the figures in the parable. Again, we should not read too much into the individual parts of the parable, but first seek the single truth it is trying to teach first.
 

dcontroversal

Senior Member
Dec 12, 2013
42,070
14,696
113
#52
“JESUS’ TRUE FAMILY - Matthew 12

46 While He (Christ) yet talked to the people (concerns the terrible Word He has just delivered concerning Israel’s present and future state), behold, His mother and His brethren stood without, desiring to speak with Him (Jesus was probably in a particular house, with it being filled with people, with no more room for others to come in, hence His family not able to get to Him; their desire to speak with Him was not in a positive sense).

47 Then one said unto Him, Behold, Your mother and Your brethren stand without, desiring to speak with You (they had things to say to Him, but they little desired to hear what He had to say to them; thankfully, that would change after His Death and Resurrection).

48 But He answered and said unto him who told Him, Who is My mother? and who are My brethren? (This totally refutes the claims later made by the Catholic Church.)

“49 And He stretched forth His Hand toward His Disciples (refers to the original Twelve, but is not limited to them, as it refers to any and all who follow Him, as the next Passage proclaims), and said, Behold My mother and My brethren!

50 For whosoever (increases the dimensions of His family to include all who follow Him) shall do the will of My Father which is in Heaven (proclaims the qualifications for being a part of the Family of God), the same is My brother, and sister, and mother (places no significance on physical birth, but everything on spiritual birth).”

JSM
Your final conclusion has no bearing on the truth of what I posted....A son by birth will always be a son by birth.....and if anything that truth is strengthened in the spiritual realm....so.....in all honesty and without your normal "loss of salvation bias" tell me what the bolded words actually mean.....

Born from above by INCORRUPTIBLE seed

Saved to the UTTERMOST

KEPT by the POWER OF GOD

I will LOSE NOTHING, but RAISE it up the last day

He that believes on the Son is having EVERLASTING LIFE

HE that began a good work in you will FINISH IT and COMPLETE it

We are SEALED UNTO the day of REDEMPTION

I will NEVER leave thee nor FORSAKE thee

Where sin abounds, GRACE abounds the MORE
 
Sep 3, 2016
3,489
309
83
#53
Your final conclusion has no bearing on the truth of what I posted....A son by birth will always be a son by birth.....and if anything that truth is strengthened in the spiritual realm....so.....in all honesty and without your normal "loss of salvation bias" tell me what the bolded words actually mean.....

Born from above by INCORRUPTIBLE seed

Saved to the UTTERMOST

KEPT by the POWER OF GOD

I will LOSE NOTHING, but RAISE it up the last day

He that believes on the Son is having EVERLASTING LIFE

HE that began a good work in you will FINISH IT and COMPLETE it

We are SEALED UNTO the day of REDEMPTION

I will NEVER leave thee nor FORSAKE thee

Where sin abounds, GRACE abounds the MORE
Considering both Protestants and Catholics, nearly 2 billion people in the world refer to themselves as "Christian." And yet, Jesus said, "And few there be who find it," speaking of Eternal Life (Matthew 7:14).

So, this means that hundreds of millions are in the church but not "in Christ." As well, it speaks of tremendous numbers of others who are truly "in Christ," but will ultimately be removed for lack of fruit bearing. In other words, they forsake the Cross for something else (John 15:2, 6).

All born again Christians place their Faith in Jesus Christ and the Cross of Calvary for salvation. But few Christians place and maintain their Faith exclusively in Christ and the Cross of Calvary for sanctification. In other words their Faith may be in Christ but not the Cross, i.e., "The Finished Work," i.e., "The Blood of Jesus." The Apostle Paul calls this "another Jesus" (2 Cor. 11:4). Christ must never be separated from the Work of the Cross; to do so is to produce "another Jesus" (2 Cor. 11:4).
 

dcontroversal

Senior Member
Dec 12, 2013
42,070
14,696
113
#54
Considering both Protestants and Catholics, nearly 2 billion people in the world refer to themselves as "Christian." And yet, Jesus said, "And few there be who find it," speaking of Eternal Life (Matthew 7:14).

So, this means that hundreds of millions are in the church but not "in Christ." As well, it speaks of tremendous numbers of others who are truly "in Christ," but will ultimately be removed for lack of fruit bearing. In other words, they forsake the Cross for something else (John 15:2, 6).

All born again Christians place their Faith in Jesus Christ and the Cross of Calvary for salvation. But few Christians place and maintain their Faith exclusively in Christ and the Cross of Calvary for sanctification. In other words their Faith may be in Christ but not the Cross, i.e., "The Finished Work," i.e., "The Blood of Jesus." The Apostle Paul calls this "another Jesus" (2 Cor. 11:4). Christ must never be separated from the Work of the Cross; to do so is to produce "another Jesus" (2 Cor. 11:4).
Salvation is not losable nor is it kept by our performance and or a lack thereof.......Christ will LOSE nothing and he will finish and complete the work that he started while keeping us by his power.....

It must be a shame for you to serve such a weak, inept god that cannot keep his word or keep you saved.......
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#55
Brother, please define the word “lost”, as it relates to the three parables listed in Luke 15.


Are the lost saved?




V
JLB
Sorry. I didn't see this earlier. The lost are saved, in that Jesus came to seek and save the lost. The three parables are all about the same thing, sinners being found and saved
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#56
Can a son by birth ever not be a son by birth.....at what point was the prodigal...

a. Not a son by birth
b. Actually dead
If you look Matthew 21, you will find the religious leaders, scribes and Pharisees likened to sons just as they are in Luke 15, so you are reading too much into the word son. And these parables have absolutely nothi hing to do with the OSAS vs NOSAS debate. That would be using them out of their proper context, which is not safe

But on a side note, I believe that believers are secure in Christ. But the key words are believers and in Christ
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#57
Not in the parable.
You have to destroy the parable to make it say that.
Did not Jesus say they were of their father The devil?
Jesus likened the unbelieving Pharisees to sons in the parable of the two sons in Matthew 21. Perhaps you are reading things into the parables that Jesus did not intend.

The fact that Jesus likened certain Jews to sons does not mean they were all of His flock nor does it mean they were born again. In the parable of the two sons, Jesus referred to the unbelieving Pharisees as sons, albeit disobedient sons. See Matthew 21 beginning at about verse 20 or so. This removes the unfactual notion that everyone who is called a son in a parable is saved. You people read that into the parable

Parables use typological language to convey one central truth. You should not take every part of the parable so literally, but instead look for the main truth the parable is meant to teach
 
Dec 27, 2018
4,170
869
113
#58
Jesus likened the unbelieving Pharisees to sons in the parable of the two sons in Matthew 21. Perhaps you are reading things into the parables that Jesus did not intend.

The fact that Jesus likened certain Jews to sons does not mean they were all of His flock nor does it mean they were born again. In the parable of the two sons, Jesus referred to the unbelieving Pharisees as sons, albeit disobedient sons. See Matthew 21 beginning at about verse 20 or so. This removes the unfactual notion that everyone who is called a son in a parable is saved. You people read that into the parable

Parables use typological language to convey one central truth. You should not take every part of the parable so literally, but instead look for the main truth the parable is meant to teach
Sorry. The parable of the two sons that also likens the Pharisees to sons does not begin in verse 20; it begins in verse 28, ( of Matthew 21). And they were Sadducees and elders, but the saducees were no more saved than the pharisees
 

dcontroversal

Senior Member
Dec 12, 2013
42,070
14,696
113
#59
If you look Matthew 21, you will find the religious leaders, scribes and Pharisees likened to sons just as they are in Luke 15, so you are reading too much into the word son. And these parables have absolutely nothi hing to do with the OSAS vs NOSAS debate. That would be using them out of their proper context, which is not safe

But on a side note, I believe that believers are secure in Christ. But the key words are believers and in Christ
Everything you just said in the first part = moot point.....the bolded is true....

A son by birth will always be a son by birth especially when it is a BIRTH from ABOVE that is spiritual and of INCORRUPTIBLE SEED.....

You do understand the word incorruptible right.....??????
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
11,497
1,002
113
#60
Introduction VERY IMPORTANT- When you interpret a parable, you first examine setting, who is being addressed, purpose, why the parable is being told, etc. So let's do that, shall we?

Context-

A. Setting- Pharisees complain about Jesus eating with sinners

Who addressed to- Scribes and Pharisees

Purpose. To rebuke the Pharisees for criticizing Jesus for eating with sinners when they should have been rejoicing at the salvation of sinners. The Son of man did not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance, to seek and save the lost, etc.

B. Observations- The parable of the lost sheep, lost coin, lost son all have the same elements and meaning except there is an element ommitted on the prodigal son, which we will look at later. By the way, when interpreting a parable, you look for one main truth.

Here are the elements that are common to all three stories in Luke 15

A. Possessions. 100 sheep, 10 coins, 2 sons.

B. Loss. One is lost in each story

C. Search. There is a search for that which is lost. Jesus came to seek and to save the lost

D. The lost is found

E. A call for a celebration.

F. Then the first two stories tell of joy in heaven. The prodigal story just mentions a celebration. Joy is not mentioned. Because the very one who should be rejoicing with His Father is not rejoicing

G. The Father entreats the son to join in the celebration, because it is only fitting to rejoice that the younger son has come home

Interpretation- The meaning of the parable is clear. Jesus is saying that if the Pharisees heart was right they would rejoice in the sinners coming to Him. This is the main point that the parable makes. The parable is directed at people who are not happy when a wayward child comes home. And since it is directed at the Pharisees, the elder son is actually the main point

Who does the prodigal represent? The prodigal represents wayward sinners who come to Jesus, in context the publicans and sinners. The passage is VERY CLEAR what the prodigal represents, and the intent is also very clear. The Prodigal represents any sinner that comes to Jesus. The elder represents anyone who judges and condemns these "little sheep" that come to salvation

The parable is about the Publicans and sinners, about us and about everyone who comes to Jesus, and it is about anyone who judges one of God's little sheep

Other applications- Last note. The Publicans and sinners were not saved until they came to Jesus. The parable in it's original intent is not about backsliders, although it can be used in that application but that Is an applicantion, Not the original intent which is determined by context.

If it was about saved people who backslide, that would mean that the Publicans and sinners were saved, backslid, and were coming back to Jesus in the setting of Luke 15. That does not seem to be what the context is saying. SO while a backslider can be a prodigal that comes home, that is not the original intent of the parable. It is a possible application, but not the original meaning. Always interpret what the speaker or writer is originally sayingto say before you apply it. There can be many applications of a text, but only one interpretation. Too many people jump straight to application and ignore interpretation, and miss the actual meaning of a text.

Good exegesis leads to sound doctrine.

The Father is the fountain of Living Water, Jesus is the River that flows down to us from Him, and the Holy Spirit is the Living Water...drink deeply and live
I would see the parable in one sense more of the "waiting father" then "prodigal son" in whom the father is drawing from a far off . As in no one comes to the father unless he does draw them . The oldest son never entered in. The second born who did enter in is many times used to represent spiritual birth. First the flesh, and then the spirit .