This post which was linked on CRN contains one of the oddest attempts of storytelling I have seen. The author calls it the “Doctrine of the Three Little Pigs”. It basically takes different verses and strings them together to make the point the correct doctrine will keep us safe from the enemy. There is some truth in that statement, but I guess the thing that I found most egregious in this parable was the references to the Parable of the Prodigal Son. It seems to me the author is taking away points from the parable that are not there.

The story of the prodigal son starts with Jesus introducing us to a son who asks his father for his part of the inheritance.  First off, this request would have been enough to justify the father disowning the son, if not having him put to death for disobeying the Fifth Commandment.  This son was basically wishing his father dead.  However, the father honors his son’s wish, and gives him his inheritance.  This would have been a shocking start to this story for the Jewish audience.

It doesn’t stop there.  The son goes to a “far country” which would have been considered a cursed pagan land.  Things like famine and drought in those time would have been considered God’s judgment on evil people.  To make matters worse, the son, in order to survive ends up defiling himself further by working with pigs.  Pigs were unclean, and Jews were forbidden to raise or eat them.  Basically, Jesus makes a point of portraying this young as the most vile and disgusting thing a good Jew could think of.

So we all know how the story goes.  The son regains some sense and decides to return home and beg his father’s forgiveness in hopes of being made a servant in the house.  He starts his journey home.  Now is where the real shocking part of the story begins.  The father sees the son, and actually runs toward him.  This was not the act of a dignified Jewish father.  To top it off he gives the son a robe, a ring, and sandals.  The robe is a sign of honor, the ring a sign of inheritance, and the sandals a sign of prestige.  Basically the father gives the son back all his rights and privileges of sonship in spite of the son’s dishonorable and horrible deeds.  Then, of course, the party begins.

Enter the elder son.  This son was dutiful.  He was working in the fields for his father.  He hears the party and wonders what’s up.  When he finds out this is a party for his younger brother, he is livid.  This is the brother that deserted his father, why is his father celebrating his return?  Is there no retribution, no justice?  It seems the elder son, while dutiful, has lost the ability to experience his father’s joy.  Perhaps he doesn’t really understand the depth and width of his father’s love.  But still, the father invites him to the party.  Does the elder son accept the request?  We are left with the unanswered question.

This brings me back to the beginning of my post.  It seems that some have taken the story of the prodigal son to be a warning against sinful living.  That may be a small part of the story, but to make it a focus misses the point entirely.  It is interesting that the parable has come to be known as “The Prodigal Son”.  Many people assume the meaning of the word “prodigal” to be “wayward” or “lost”.  In actuality, the definition is this:

adjective-

1. wastefully or recklessly extravagant: prodigal expenditure.

2. giving or yielding profusely; lavish (usually fol. by of or with): prodigal of smiles; prodigal with money.

3. a person who spends, or has spent, his or her money or substance with wasteful extravagance; spendthrift.

noun

4. a person who spends, or has spent, his or her money or substance with wasteful extravagance; spendthrift.

So, yes the son can be describes as being a prodigal, since he wasted his father’s inheritance.  On the other hand, I believe it would be more accurate to call this parable, “The Prodigal Father”.  The Father in this story is the one who the Jewish audience would have considered “wasteful or recklessly extravagant”.  He bestows honor and wealth on a son who earlier in the story wished him dead.  He gives lavish gifts that the son didn’t deserve.  This story is about the extravagant love of God.

So the question we must ask ourselves is the same question that the elder son is left with.  Will we partake in the Father’s extravagant love toward sinners, or will we remain outside and be bitter that sinners do not get what is coming to them.  It is the choice between cynicism and joy, judgment or acceptance.