An Alternative Perspective on the Parable of the Prodigal Son

This parable, like most parables is shared in a group of three. Parables were intended not only to convey some deep meaning but to offer some food for thought that was counter-intuitive or that caused some degree of cognitive dissonance or discomfort in the listeners as well as often allowing a number of possible interpretations and perspective, though there would normally be a central theme shared by all three placed together (either in the telling, or later by the author of the Gospel or other writing that they are placed within).

The three here are the parable of the lost sheep that was found; the parable of the lost coin that was found and the young son who was also ‘found’.

To highlight a little of the discordant or counter-intuitive nature of each, consider that in reality a shepherd would not leave the ninety-nine to search for the one lost, and the woman who finds the one lost coin of the ten, appears to throw a party (‘Rejoice with me …’) to celebrate the finding of the lost coin and may end up spending it’s value on the party!

There are many more unusual factors in the Prodigal Son parable.

Most are very familiar with this parable. We know the basic story how the younger of two sons gets his inheritance from his wealthy father; heads on to foreign places and a wild party life; spends it all and ends up destitute. He then realises how much better off he would be back with his father, even as a slave and so returns. His father sees him coming and rushes to welcome him and throws a welcome home party.

[‘… He was lost and is found …’ – you can certainly hear echo’s of the other two parables here.]

Then the older, reliable, responsible son hears about it and he is not happy. His father though tells him not to get upset as all he now has will one day be the older son’s.

Or at least that’s the basic story. See the full account from Luke 15:11-32 below.

Given that the focus of the story and the majority of the narrative is about the younger son, we are naturally led to conclude that the main moral of story has something to do with the actions of the younger son. This is supported in the concluding statement ending with: “… this brother of yours was dead but has come back to life — he was lost but has been found.”.

But as I have already intimated, parables were designed to have a twist; to share something in a way that would open the minds of the listeners to some new perspective and understanding; to challenge the ‘status-quo’, to surprise the hearer/reader in some unexpected way so as to prompt them to re-think their understanding.

So what if the true focus of the parable is the father. Note the focus of the lost sheep parable is really the joy of the shepherd, and with the lost coin it is the joy of the woman whose owned the coin.

So with this consistent theme isn’t the real focus the joy of the father on the return of his son?

And I don’t think it’s about the father in a sense representing God, the Father in Heaven, (after all, the Father in Heaven surely does not have sons and slaves, and He would surely not be so economically foolish as to sell half his estate and in so doing put the remaining estate under economic strain),  but rather it’s about the father’s character and his actions and what we can learn from him, by modelling his behaviour, not that of either son.

Before I go on though, even this re-focus from the Prodigal Son to the father should immediately bring some sense of discordance, or perhaps a sense of intrigue and expectancy as you wish to know more.

Professor Amy-Jill Levine (Professor of New Testament Studies at Vanderbilt University Divinity School), gives some fascinating insights on this parable, and arrives at this very different understanding of the core message being conveyed.

I will first share just some of her insights and arguments and then give some further thoughts regarding her intriguing conclusion.

Prof Levine firstly describes the introduction of the parable along these lines:

“The younger son asks his father for his share of the inheritance, and the father “divided his property between them.” The request is a presumptuous insult to the father (see Sir. 33:20–24) and unfair dealing with the elder brother, while the father’s response is neither good parenting nor good business."

The younger son travels to “a distant land,” squanders his property in “dissolute living,” faces famine, and in his desperation, hires himself out to a local who sends him to feed the pigs. The younger son would “gladly have filled himself with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything.”

“When he came to himself, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired hands have bread enough to spare, but here I am dying of hunger? I will get up and go to my father and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands.’”

Prof. Levine is not convinced from the information we are given that the younger son has really repented. She argues that the son is traditionally regarded as manifesting repentance,  faith, and humility, but she believes his primary motive be his lack of food, rather than some theological truth.

She points out that surprisingly, unlike the shepherd and the woman in the first two parables, the father did not call his older son to join the festivities. What is the significance of this?

She also points out that when the older son does hear the news of the younger’s return and the festivities he states, “Listen, for all these years I have been working like a slave for you and I have never disobeyed your command; yet you have never given me even a young goat so that I might celebrate with my friends. ...”, he appears rather selfish and perhaps hypocritical. She suggests that the actual slaves would not have thought the older son really worked like he was one of them, so that would have heard his remarks as at the very least exaggeration and perhaps even hypocritical.

Prof Levine also asks, if the older son really does now own all of the remaining estate, what does the younger son now receive? Is he really returned to full status as a son, or does he really now become a ‘hired hand’?

Sadly, and it is with some shame, I think that Christians should acknowledge that most preachers and Christian theologians regard the younger son as the repentant (Gentile) Christian and the older, as the self-righteous hypocritical Jew.

But neither the lost sheep nor the lost coin repent.

So perhaps the younger son did not repent either, but more significantly such an argument does not appear to be the central thesis of the parable. And yet as the parables move from 100 to 10 to 1, the reader’s attention is naturally drawn to the younger son and, hence, away from his brother (as per the arguably flawed standard Christian take).

I have heard many different 'Christian' takes though, including one where the Pastor did argue that the son didn't repent but was still welcomed into the Kingdom and hence he argued for Universalism (that all, and I mean all, humanity would be 'saved' and have a place in the Olam HaBah, the Coming Age)!

Prof. Levine also goes on to briefly discuss some modern classifications that offer alternative lenses. In one reading she refers to, the younger son corresponds to Freud’s id; the elder brother, to the superego; and the father, to the ego, with the father’s excessive generosity masking hostility and the elder brother’s resentment of his brother displaced onto the father!

But Professor Amy-Jill Levine’s personal take is that the parable is really about the father, just as the lost sheep parable focuses on the shepherd and the lost coin parable on the woman.

And therefore we may ask, what should we learn from the father?

Does his open heart for his ‘lost son’ reflect how we should all act; does it reflect the heart of the Father?

Who should we really identify with? The older or younger son or the father?

Which of the father’s actions should we admire and try to emulate the most? His giving away part of his estate in what may have been a foolish action; his embracing of his younger son on his return; his profound words to his older son?

Or lastly his joy at redemption, at the return of the lost into the bosom of the family?

Luke 15:11-32

Again Yeshua said, “A man had two sons. 12 The younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of the estate that will be mine.’ So the father divided the property between them. 13 As soon as he could convert his share into cash, the younger son left home and went off to a distant country, where he squandered his money in reckless living. 14 But after he had spent it all, a severe famine arose throughout that country, and he began to feel the pinch.

15 “So he went and attached himself to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him into his fields to feed pigs. 16 He longed to fill his stomach with the carob pods the pigs were eating, but no one gave him any.

17 “At last he came to his senses and said, ‘Any number of my father’s hired workers have food to spare; and here I am, starving to death! 18 I’m going to get up and go back to my father and say to him, “Father, I have sinned against Heaven and against you; 19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired workers.” ’ 20 So he got up and started back to his father.

“But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was moved with pity. He ran and threw his arms around him and kissed him warmly. 21 His son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against Heaven and against you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son — ’ 22 but his father said to his slaves, ‘Quick, bring out a robe, the best one, and put it on him; and put a ring on his finger and shoes on his feet; 23 and bring the calf that has been fattened up, and kill it. Let’s eat and have a celebration! 24 For this son of mine was dead, but now he’s alive again! He was lost, but now he has been found!’ And they began celebrating.

25 “Now his older son was in the field. As he came close to the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 So he called one of the servants and asked, ‘What’s going on?’ 27 The servant told him, ‘Your brother has come back, and your father has slaughtered the calf that was fattened up, because he has gotten him back safe and sound.’ 28 But the older son became angry and refused to go inside.

“So his father came out and pleaded with him. 29 ‘Look,’ the son answered, ‘I have worked for you all these years, and I have never disobeyed your orders. But you have never even given me a young goat, so that I could celebrate with my friends. 30 Yet this son of yours comes, who squandered your property with prostitutes, and for him you slaughter the fattened calf!’ 31 ‘Son, you are always with me,’ said the father, ‘and everything I have is yours. 32 We had to celebrate and rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead but has come back to life — he was lost but has been found.’”- CJB