I am sure the story of the prodigal son is not foreign to any of us. It is the story of the young man who demanded his share of inheritance and then squandered it in loose living. It is very often used to illustrate a father's love for his son and his willingness to forgive and forget when the son repents, just like our Father up in heaven. However, every time I read of the parable, my attention is always drawn to the most insignificant character in the whole of the parable-- the man's elder son, the prodigal son's brother.
One cannot deny that, of the two sons the man had, the elder one should be the 'pet son', the favourite child, for he was obedient and diligently worked his father's farm without making much of a demand, that is, except during the last part. However, at the end of the story, he was portrayed to be somewhat of a villain. He was not happy that his father made such a fuss of his little brother's return, when his silent labour went almost unnoticed and unappreciated. Of course, if we were in Sunday School classes or Bible Knowledge class, we would have been told that he was in the wrong, for he should have rejoiced for the return of his brother who was "dead and is alive again; was lost and is found". After all, this is the correct answer, if we were asked such a question under such circumstances. Well, it is a parable, and if a new believer has returned to God's family, we should be rejoicing. True, it is a parable, and if there is a new believer, we will indeed rejoice for the lost sheep that has returned. But let's look at it in the earthly context rather than its heavenly context. After all, this is a story set in an earthly setting. What if YOU were in the place of the brother? I can't deny the fact that, very often, I actually identify with the brother.
As I continue, do allow me to name the characters (the Bible did not name them), as it will ease any references made to the characters instead of using lots of pronouns to identify them. Let's call the father Mr. Richie (I supposed he was rather rich to enable his son to have a fair share of inheritance), the elder brother Richie Sr, and the younger brother Richie Jr.
One day, Richie Jr approached his father to get his share of half the inheritance. Let's assume that Mr. Richie had $1000, so half of that will be $500. He took the money and then went off to a place somewhat similar to today's Las Vegas and spent all his money there and indulged in all sorts of enjoyment: gambling, women, alcohol and clubbing. At the same time, Richie Sr was working hard, with sweat dripping from his brow to earn money and make profit for his father's household without a single word of complaint and making no demands whatsoever to his father. He was doing what is within the scope of responsibility of a son.
Then one fine day, say 1 month down the road, that jerk of a brother returns and apologetically asks for forgiveness. Not only was he granted forgiveness, but a party was thrown to celebrate his homecoming. Expensive gifts were showered upon him to celebrate his safe return, when Richie Sr who was working so hard did not get so much of a pat on the back. I can understand why Richie Sr was so upset.
Let's take the story a little further. If Mr. Richie died 5 years later, and on the average, his annual profit from the farm was about $100, at the time of his death, his inheritance would have amounted to $900 (assuming he spent $100 for the party: the leftover of $400 + the extra $500 earned in 5 years). Then, his inheritance will be divided among his sons. Although I am not sure if it will be equally divided, I am sure both sons will at least get something. Let's assume Richie Sr got $600 (being the first born and also for his labour) and Richie Jr got $300. Well, in total, Richie Sr got only $600, while his brother got $900 (initial $500 + party $100 + $300). So much for working faithfully for his father!
I never understand why Richie Sr was the one being rebuked while he had been the faithful son all along. I think he had grounds to ask to be treated more highly than his brother, after all, it was he who did all the work, while the brother was enjoying himself. He should be rewarded for his faithfulness and hard work, while his brother who was so irresponsible and useless had nothing to lose. I truly understand why he felt so upset.
I am still in a puzzle, as many times, I find myself identifying with Richie Sr. Please do leave a comment and enlighten me.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Yea, i can understand your feelings. If i were the elder son in the parable, i would also get angry and upset because i would not understand why my father had thrown a big party fot my younger brother who has just returned, while i struggle to help my father without even complaining or making any demands.
In Sunday School and Bible study, we learnt that the elder son is portrayed like a villain because he was angry about his father celebrating the return of his younger brother, where in reality he should have celebrated together with his father.
I actually felt mystified too by this parable. I too feel that the elder son should be treated better by his father as he had done all the hard work while his brother was outside enjoying. Thus, he deserves some reward for his hard work.
*courtesy of Ian Lam
Hmm…interesting stuff. hehe. got economics somemore. Hehe. Well…allow me to say a few words…:P
To start, we must remember that Jesus did not tell parables to have only an earthly point of view. A parable is an earthly story that has a heavenly meaning. We all agree on this, right? :P For me, I can see this parable about God’s grace. The prodigal son was eagerly accepted back into the family with a party and all even though he did not deserve it. The way he asked for his share in the inheritance from his then still alive father was the equivalent of wishing the old man be dead. Do you think he deserved to be accepted back as a son? But the father, out of love and grace for the son took him back.
What about the elder son? He is a model son-working hard for the family and not disobeying any orders. From the text, he seems to feel underappreciated for his efforts. He is saying, “Dad, I worked hard for you therefore I deserve this and that”. He was trying to gain his father’s favour when actually he had it all the while-“…you are always with me and all I have is yours”. But why he felt this way? Maybe he was not in the limelight. Note that his younger bro was getting all the attention and he was alone outside. He must be thinking, “I deserve the attention and the glory, not my good-for-nothing brother!” Is this sometimes with us? We tend to want to get glory for ourselves when all glory should be given back to God and we keep nothing (I mean not even a pin-head amount) of the glory for ourselves. We should serve God in humility and not expect anything. “We are unworthy servants. We have only done what was our duty” Luke 17:10. It is up to God to reward us accordingly.
The all-righteous Pharisees can be used as an example. They worked hard indeed towards righteousness and towards gaining God’s favour. They obeyed (or at least tried to obey) the 600+ laws to the very dot. They tried to get God’s salvation through works when actually salvation can only be found through Jesus Christ which is by grace through faith. When the Gentiles, whom they considered unclean, received righteousness without having to obey the laws, they must be saying, “Lord, what is this? These ‘unclean’ people are gaining your favour and righteousness without obeying the law while we obeyed them to the very dot! They did nothing to receive your favour while we toiled to keep your law!”
From the book of Acts and up to the present day, we can see the Jews strongly refusing to accept salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. They continue to refuse to go to the party even till now the Father is pleading with them.
Hehe. I think too ‘chiong hei’ adi. Hehe. Tell me what you think yah.
Post a Comment