Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadBob Utley You Can Understand the Bible - Luke 15:11 - 15:24
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Luk_15:11-24
11And He said, "A man had two sons. 12The younger of them said to his father, 'Father, give me the share of the estate that falls to me.' So he divided his wealth between them. 13And not many days later, the younger son gathered everything together and went on a journey into a distant country, and there he squandered his estate with loose living. 14Now when he had spent everything, a severe famine occurred in that country, and he began to be impoverished. 15So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. 16And he would have gladly filled his stomach with the pods that the swine were eating, and no one was giving anything to him. 17But when he came to his senses, he said, 'How many of my father's hired men have more than enough bread, but I am dying here with hunger! 18I will get up and go to my father, and will say to him, "Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight; 19I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me as one of your hired men."' 20So he got up and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion for him, and ran and embraced him and kissed him. 21And the son said to him, 'Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.' 22But the father said to his slaves, 'Quickly bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet; 23and bring the fattened calf, kill it, and let us eat and celebrate; 24for this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.' And they began to celebrate."
Luk_15:11 "two sons" These will typify the Jews who heard Jesus: (1) the common people and (2) the religious leaders. Their response to the lostness of all humans (in this context, Israelites) before God will be very different. One group rejoices in the potential salvation of all humans, but the other is offended by God's love for all humans.
Luk_15:12 "give me the share of the estate that falls to me" This did not belong to him until his father's death. It would involve one-third of the estate with two thirds going to the oldest son (cf. Deu_21:17). This shows a rebellious, unloving, independent spirit. This very question would have been unheard of in eastern culture. This implies a desire for the father's death (cf. Kenneth E. Bailey, Poet and Peasant, pp. 142-206).
▣ "So he divided his wealth between them" There are several cultural and legal reasons for an early inheritance to be given, but not at the request of a son! The father's actions in allowing this inappropriate and culturally unheard of request does not denote God's character, but is a literary device to accentuate God's undeserved and overwhelming love and forgiveness later in the parable.
As for the older son, his silence at both the brother's request and the father's action would be unforgivable in eastern culture. He should have vigorously protested. He also will be singled out for censure at the conclusion of the parable. As a matter of fact, he represents the attitudes of the Pharisees. (Will they accept sinners like God does, or will he reject his brother?)
Luk_15:13 "gathered everything together" To transfer the farm assets into cash meant to (1) disrupt the farm and even jeopardize its future existence and (2) sell them at a very reduced price.
If land was involved, the buyer did not take possession until after the father's death. The father would have use of it until then.
▣ "and went on a journey" This represents the younger son's seeking independence from the family. He will do it his way!
NASB "there he squandered his estate with loose living"
NKJV "there he wasted his possession with prodigal living"
NRSV "there he squandered his property in dissolute living"
TEV "where he wasted his money in reckless living"
NJB "where he squandered his money on a life of debauchery"
PESHITTA
(Syriac)"there he wasted his wealth in extravagant living"
This is from the verb sôzô (save) with the alpha privative (one who cannot save). All English translations translate asôtôs, an adverb which occurs only here in the NT, as immoral, godless, riotous living (cf. Luk_15:3 and the LXX of Pro_7:11; Pro_28:7). However, the fifth century Syriac (Aramaic) version denotes one who is careless or thoughtless with his resources (German Bible Society's Greek - English Lexicon of the Septuagint, lists "wastefulness" as a translation option for asôtia, p. 69), but not necessarily immoral (cf. Kittel, vol. 1, p. 507 and Louw and Nida, vol. 1, p. 753).
Luk_15:15 "he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country" The key interpretive issue is the word "hired" (kollaô). It is used predominately by Luke and Paul. It can mean "associate with" (cf. Act_5:13; Act_9:26; Act_10:28), "cleave to" (cf. Mat_19:5; Luk_10:11), or "join" (cf. Act_8:29; 17:74). It originally meant "to glue." Did this young foolish Jew hire himself out for wages or did he cling desperately to a local, non-Jewish farmer for life? The question is one of desperation. How desperate was the young man? How much in need?
Possibly "the citizen" was trying to get rid of the Jewish young man by asking him to feed pigs! Perhaps he was so hungry, so desperate, so in need, that he would do anything just to survive.
Luk_15:16
NASB, NKJV "he would have gladly filled his stomach with the pods"
NRSV "he would have gladly filled himself with the pods"
TEV "he wished he could fill himself with the bean pods"
NJB "he would willingly have filled himself with the husks"
The first two translations follow the ancient Greek manuscripts P75, à , B, D, L, and Augustine's Greek text, which has the verb gemizô and the word "stomach." However, the last three follow the ancient Greek manuscript A and the Old Latin Vulgate and Syriac versions, which have the verb chortazô and excludes the word "stomach." Usually when à and B agree over A, modern textual critics follow the former manuscripts. However, the UBS4 gives the second option a "B" (almost certain) rating. It is somewhat surprising that the NASB (1995) follows KJV.
As usual, this variant does not affect the meaning of the passage.
▣ "the pods" There were apparently two types of this carob bean (cf. Bailey, Poet and Peasant, pp. 171-172). One is found in Syria, which is sweet and eaten by the general population. The other is a wild carob which is a short plant with black, sour berries. It does not provide enough sustenance for life. It is these wild berries that the young man wanted to eat, but he knew they would not help his hunger.
▣ "and no one was giving anything to him" In context this may mean that other servants would not let him eat the pigs' food. Here is the problem of a cruel world. This is a situation that this young man did not plan for, now he was in life-threatening need (cf. Luk_15:17).
Luk_15:17
NASB, TEV,
NJB "he came to his senses"
NKJV, NRSV,
PESHITTA"he came to himself"
This is a Hebraic idiom of (1) acceptance of responsibility and repentance or (2) a person's internal thought process, an epiphany (cf. Luk_18:4, the exact Greek phrase). Luk_15:18-19 imply meaning #1.
▣ "hired men" There were several levels of servants in rural village life of the Near East (cf. Bailey, Poet and Peasant, p. 176):
1. doulos, a domestic servant who lived with the master
2. paides, slaves who performed menial tasks but lived on the farm
3. misthos, temporary, hired workers who did not live on the farm
In context #2 fits best as the desire of the son.
Luk_15:18 "against heaven" This is another circumlocution which refers to God. See note at Luk_15:10.
Luk_15:20 "But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him. . .and ran. . .and embraced him and kissed him" The father's expectancy and unusual actions reflect the intensity of his love.
The last two actions, "embraced him" and "kissed him," may reflect the Septuagint of Gen_33:4; Gen_45:14-15, which denotes reunion. The last action, "kissed him," could be a sign of forgiveness from 2Sa_14:33. This compound term, kata + phileô, implies fervent affection (cf. Luk_7:38; Act_20:37).
When interpreting parables one must look for the central truth (usually in what would be culturally shocking or unexpected) and not push (allegorize) all the details. The father's actions in allowing the young man's initial request which jeopardized the whole family, was morally and culturally inappropriate. They must not be attributed as characteristics of God. God will not give us what would destroy us! He does, however, give us the freedom to destroy ourselves! However, the father's unconditional forgiveness and gracious restoration of such an undeserving person is surely a characteristic of God. Remember the parable's larger context is the unforgiving and non-accepting attitude of the Pharisees (i.e., the older brother, Luk_15:25-32, especially Luk_15:28).
Luk_15:21 There is a Greek manuscript variant in the verse. Some ancient texts at the end of the sentence have "your son," but others add the remaining phrase from Luk_15:19 ("make me as one of your hired men"). Scribes tended to fill out phrases, therefore, UBS4 gives the shorter text an "A" rating (certain).
Luk_15:22 The intensity of the moment is carried by the three aorist active imperatives. The slaves are commanded to do these things immediately!
▣ "best robe" This was a sign of position in the family.
▣ "a ring" This was a sign of his restored family position and authority.
▣ "sandals" This was a sign of a son of the owner, not a hired servant.
Luk_15:23 "the fattened calf" The Jews ate red meat only at very special occasions. This was the most valuable meat available.
Kenneth E. Bailey, Poet and Peasant/Through Peasant Eyes, makes the comment that by implication the killing of the fatted calf involved the whole community. There would be too much meat just for the estate. If so, this implies that the father solves the problem of the young son's acceptance back into the community by this feast (cf. pp. 181-187).
Also notice that this lavish banquet for the rebellious son is the unexpected element of the parable. Table fellowship was a Jewish metaphor for heaven (eschatological banquet). The shock is that the younger son (symbolizing the tax collectors and sinners) is the object of the feast, while the older son (symbolizing the religious leaders) refuses to attend and makes the point that there is no feast for him. This role reversal is typical of Jesus' teachings.
Luk_15:24 This parallels Luk_15:6-7; Luk_15:9-10. Heaven rejoices at the restoration of sinners!