Is the Prodigal Son Sincere in his Repentance?
Seems like an easy question, but here’s why I ask. The story of the Prodigal Son – which, along with that of the Good Samaritan – is probably the most famous of Jesus’ parables. And it’s the reading this Sunday in those churches that use the Revised Common Lectionary, which means that a lot of preachers will be asking just this question.
Before answering it, it may help to set the parable in context: Jesus has been preaching, teaching, healing and more to the delight of some and to the consternation of others. Luke captures the general goings-on of this part of Jesus’ ministry in the verses that set the stage for the telling of the story about the prodigal and the two parables that immediately precede it:
Now all the tax-collectors and sinners were coming near to listen to him. And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, “This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.”
Now before we get too down on the Pharisees, lets remind ourselves that these are the volunteers who show up to do most of the work at the synagogue. So essentially, these good folks are akin to our Church Council or Board of Elders members, the Sunday School and VBS teachers, and the youth group leaders. And they’re upset because Jesus is hanging out with some pretty shady characters. “Sinners” in Luke’s gospel doesn’t denote people who have sinned in general, the way we might use the word; rather, “sinners” is reserved for the really bad, the one’s that have no place in polite society – the thieves and prostitutes and more. And, just to be clear, the tax collectors of Jesus’ day have nothing in common with the folks who work for the IRS. Tax collectors made their money – often a lot of it – by working for the Romans – that is, the foreign army occupying Israel! – to collect money from their neighbors. The Romans set a quota, and everything over that quota the tax collectors could keep. So the more they squeezed their neighbors, the richer they got.
So no wonder the Sunday School teachers and Church Council members are upset with Jesus for spending his free time socializing with prostitutes, bandits, and traitors.
In response, he doesn’t get mad or defensive, instead he tells a story. Three, actually. In the first, a shepherd leaves ninety-nine sheep in the wilderness (a dangerous prospect at best) to search for one that got lost. In the second, a woman who loses a coin – one tenth of her wealth – searches all night until she finds it…and then throws a party that probably cost as much or more as the coin she sought. After each story Jesus says that there is “joy in heaven” when any “sinner repents,” or turns back. Then he tells this story:
There was a man who had two sons. The younger of them said to his father, “Father, give me the share of the property that will belong to me.” So he divided his property between them. A few days later the younger son gathered all he had and travelled to a distant country, and there he squandered his property in dissolute living. When he had spent everything, a severe famine took place throughout that country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed the pigs. He would gladly have filled himself with the pods that the pigs were eating; and no one gave him anything. But when he came to himself he said, “How many of my father’s hired hands have bread enough and 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.’ ” So he set off and went to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion; he ran and put his arms around him and kissed him. Then the son said to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.” But the father said to his slaves, “Quickly, bring out a robe—the best one—and put it on him; put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. And get the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and celebrate; for this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found!” And they began to celebrate.
Now his elder son was in the field; and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing. He called one of the slaves and asked what was going on. He replied, “Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fatted calf, because he has got him back safe and sound.” Then he became angry and refused to go in. His father came out and began to plead with him. But he answered his father, “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. But when this son of yours came back, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fatted calf for him!” Then the father said to him, “Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. But we had to celebrate and rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; he was lost and has been found.” ’
So what do you think: Is the younger son sincere? I always assumed he was until I came across some art work a few years ago that depicted him with a rather sly look on his face. Which got me to thinking…and then reading. I mean, when you look carefully at the text, you realize that when it says he “came to himself” it’s not that he realizes he’s been a big fat jerk but only that his father’s servants have it way better than he does. So is the next line sincere, as in “Oh my goodness, I better tell my dad that ‘I have sinned against you and heaven…’”? Or is it, “I know what I’ll do. I’ll go back all contrite and everything and tell the old man that I know I’ve sinned and he’ll be sure to take me back”?
What do you think?
Another question. Does it matter?
On the one hand, I think it matters in that it affects the way we read and interpret this parable. If he’s sincere, then this parable is probably about repentance, that God is always willing to take back those who repent. If he’s not, then it’s really a whole lot more about God’s joy at our return. After all, the father in the story doesn’t even let the son get out his (possibly bogus) confession; he cuts him off midway and reinstates him then and there back into the family.
Perhaps the parable is vague on purpose. Perhaps some people repent first and then come to faith. Perhaps others come to faith, or even to church, for all kinds of various and sundry reasons, all kinds of mixed motives (are there really any other kind of motives?), yet after being received by God they come to repent of their former lives.
Or maybe we’ve got repentance mixed up to begin with. Perhaps repentance isn’t about a moral change of heart or heartfelt regret or any of the usual stuff, maybe it’s literally “turning around” and God just doesn’t care what makes us turn around, as long as we come home.
So what do you think – about the prodigal, his confession, his father, his brother, and the whole deal? I’d be very interested in hearing from you…as would a whole lot of preachers I know! 🙂
Where the parables took me this past Sunday were to a new parable about the lost internet connection (As I suspected, 12 people over 3 services knew anything about sheep outside of the biblical context, hence the new parable for us).
It was a modern telling pointing at the same truths that I saw- the things that obscure the connection of the shepherd, woman, father, or in this case the guy sitting at the computer. It was about clutter of being out in the wilderness and losing your way, the mess that she lost her coin in and needed to sweep up, the greed and gluttony the younger son felt, and the clutter of resentment and bitterness which hits the older brother who forsakes his good relationship with his dad when he’s left out of the party and confronts his dad about “that son of yours”, …. being just like the tangles of wires and buildup of bad files and viruses. So we have to find ways to reconnect to the outside world, the outcasts, and to God, by cleaning out files, rearranging our lives, and decluttering.
So how to clear the clutter and find/strengthen that connection? For our purposes, I focused on the older brother’s characteristics and how we like to use the ‘us/them’ ‘insider/outsider’ tags like the scribes & Pharisees did. We so often cannot accept God’s welcoming of those who don’t deserve it, thinking that we’ve been the ones working steadily at our father’s estate this whole time.
Yet the reality may be that we really are the lost sons and daughters coming home because we’ve nothing left but the mess of our life falling apart around us. When that happens, God sees us, rushes to us, forgives us, welcomes us home, and rejoices. But it doesn’t stop there- Jesus wants the scribes and Pharisees to do that, wants us to do that for others. He wants us to be the different big brothers & sisters who are working out in the field, yet we see our brother and dad embracing and drop everything to rush to the outcast and hug them, welcome them, and throw a party for them.
When that happens, the connection is not just to God but to our neighbors in a way that is clear, strong, welcoming, grace-filled, and transformative. Cheers 🙂
First, I love that you ask for feedback! I absolutely love discussion!
At any rate, I also love the parable of the lost sheep and the shepherd going forth to find him. It’s a little different than the Prodigal Son, in that the father doesn’t go out to find him, but does welcome him back instantly.
Another minister asked these questions…”Do you think the lost sheep did anything to merit the shepherd seeking him? Do you think the sheep repented? In the story, the sheep is found and the shepherd picks him up and puts him on his shoulders. I guess the only thing the sheep did was “allow himself” to be rescued. Pretty easy stuff and maybe all we’re really capable of “doing?” We allow ourselves to be saved.
the sheep didn’t know it was lost — until it got found. the son — did he know he was lost — under the father put his arms around him? 1) I do think that we make repentance/forgiveness into a transaction (if we repent, God will forgive us), which is one of the ways we try to make salvation something in our hands, not God’s. 2 on the other hand, I think that repentance is not so much whether he feels bad or not, but whether he did actually turn toward home, for whatever motive. (and are ANY of our motives entirely pure?)
I think that we repent not in order to be forgiven, but because we have been forgiven.
as well, I think we are really big fans of the “sudden conversion story”, whether it is the moment the son turns toward home, or the moment the father puts his arms around him, “suddenly!” he is transformed!
could it be that the moment he turned toward home is just the first good thing he did in a long while, and the experience of daily living again with the father’s love will be a daily experience of repentance and forgiveness and transformation, because he will again be in his father’s house? just sayin’…
Yes! His turning toward home was just the first good thing he’d done in a while. The act of accepting the father’s forgiveness will have an effect on him. It’s not a “done deal” the moment he “comes to himself”. The father’s welcome is not predicated on his repentance – the father’s welcome just is. Living in grace changes you!
My comment is a question . How can the 2nd son even be called a ‘ son ‘when Jesus’ final point is ‘every sinner ‘ who repents ?
I am so enjoying these reflections and discussions. Im thinking that its both that
maybe it’s that repentance is literally “turning around” and God just doesn’t care what makes us turn around, as long as we come home. and that this causes him GREAT JOY.
What better relationship could we possible want or hunger for…or could other hunger for if they know this…the GREAT JOY that God has for them and for relationship with them.
My answer to the questions before “Does it matter?” *is* the question “Does it matter?” One would certainly hope his motivation was sincere repetence; however, even if it was not, the jesture of coming home was a good first step (it allowed for repair of the relationship; in particular, the forgiveness offered by the father would have fed the prodigal son more than the feast itself, giving him the fortitude and gratitude through which to work-through any unfinished repetence and try to “sin no more”). Also, even if the prodigal son strays again, the father’s act of forgiveness was an important lesson for the other son (current-day church faithful) to learn (to be more Father-like/saintly in their relationships).
The sheep wandered off not willfully but stupidly. The son took off willfully, believing himself shrewd. The coin fell into the hand of a poor housekeeper. All three got lost due to their own nature.
There is no other way to return to God but just as we are: unsure of how we got lost, unsure of our own heart’s repentance. God created us. God knows us. God loves us just the same.
There is a whole litany of younger brothers in the Hebrew Bible who God rewards over the favor of the older brothers. Abel, Jacob, Joseph, and David are four that readily come to mind. They are often shrewd, manipulative, and take advantage of their fathers and siblings alike. In three of these four cases, they wind up having reconciling encounters with members of their families and/or repenting for their sins.
I wonder if Luke is (un)intentionally picking up on this tradition. I may be reading into it as well. If, as David suggests, Jesus is striving to send a message to the righteous ones in his audience, then it seems to make sense to me that the youngest son does not need to be righteous in order to gain his father’s favor. The father, blindly or otherwise, stupidly or otherwise, simply delights in his youngest son’s presence back home. Perhaps one moment in the family’s life will lead to another cathartic and redemptive one later on. We have to be present to one another in order for incarnational love to occur. Does Jesus’ death on the cross require us to turn around and accept it, shrewdly or otherwise?
It is our tendency as preachers and hearers of The Word to typically accept the easiest and traditional understandings of those scriptures. What’s tough yet beautiful like the Father’s Unconditional Love to real sinners in this particular case?
Thanks Jim Strader for the intertextual comment. Since Luke intentionally moves from these intertextual examples they cannot be far from his theological drives in this text. At least that is my perspective.
Perhaps the strongest theme that runs across the three stories is that God loves us more than we can understand.
The question of the sincerity of the repentance is one question that is important to raise. Another is the question of what the writer of Luke-Acts wanted to convey at this point in his gospel. After all he is the single “witness” to this parable.
After working with some of the art that interprets the story I began to see some other questions regarding the depiction of the characters in the story.
Did the prodigal son gain a brother upon the prodigal’s return? Had he lost one? And did the elder brother who remained by his father’s side gain a brother upon the return of the prodigal? And how did the father understand sonship?
In addition, I have always been struck by the fact that there is no mention of the mother in the story. This missing facet of the story provokes the question, “What may have been transpiring in her heart and mind?” What did she think when the young son left? And what of his return?
For some additional reflection and two paintings I invite you to go to .
W. S. Merwin has an amazing long poem on Prodigal; also, Henry Nouwen entire book.
BOBRAXTON – The Merwin poem is extraordinary. If you search it on You Tube you will find an extraordinary reading of the poem with graphics. Several are from the painter Tissot who I am using on my church site for the Bible Discussion and reading the prodigal son.
I read earlier, in the Orthodox Study Bible commentary section:’ “portion of the goods” (Gr. ousia, lit. “essence”) indicates man receiving his free will and rational mind from God. As Adam did in Eden, the younger son uses these possessions to rebel against his father. The far country represents life in exile from God.’ I’ve never seen this, interesting.
Yes, the Father’s unconditional love just is.
The question as to whether the Prodigal’s repentance is sincere is irrelevant. Whether sincere or not, whatever his motivation actually is, it brings him home to experience his father’s loving and enthusiastic embrace. In effect the prodigal says, “Wait a minute, Dad. You have not heard my speech,” which he then repeats. The father “responds” by speaking to one his slaves.
For me the clear message is precisely not what we teach, ie confess your sins, ask God for forgiveness, and God will forgive you — usually done via a corporate confession during the Sunday liturgy and the minister pronouncing an absolution. Repeat: this is not the message of the parable.
So, what is the message? The prodigal’s “confession” brings him home to experience the father’s unconditional love. In other words, the confession opens the door to receive the father’s love, grace, and forgiveness, and the prodigal will attend the celebration — fatted calf and all.
The older brother is the alternative. In his world there are no sins to be acknowledged, no shortcomings to be confessed. Therefore, the window to the father’s unconditional love remains closed; he will not attend the party.
Luke 15:1-3 seems to support this interpretation. The scribes and Pharisees are the older brother in the parable. But everyone (including us) gets sucked into focusing on the prodigal, as in “is his repentance sincere?” And to take the interpretation one step further, the parable is addressed to us — we are the older brother in our own day.
Perhaps we’re too concerned with justice in asking if the younger son was sincere. Clearly the father didn’t care if the son was sincere, he seems not even to be interested in any explanation or confession by the son. The Father was simply full of mercy and always ready to welcome the son back.
I think it matter immensely how we interpret this passage. The Church has been divided (in part) throughout history over such things as repentance and the mechanism for it and grace the the mechanism for it. People have been killed over such issues historically!
It matters deeply.
Is God’s grace sufficient buy not effectual? How? Is the Father’s love a severe mercy at times? Doesn’t the Bible elsewhere speak of insincerity before God as a hindrance to receiving God’s grace? I do not think we should easily or casually brush off issues of repentance; how it works, how it happens, and where God is in the midst of it.
I think these things should be carefully, prayerfully, and methodically combed through.
The Prodigal Son did three things to facilitate restoration. He said,”Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. 19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired servants.” What do you think the Father’s reaction to his wayward son would have been if he did not repent and ask for forgiveness?
He never said these words to his father. This was the little speech he was rehearsing to himself to trick his father into taking him back. It is not at all obvious that any parable was intended by Jesus to have a solution. Instead, they require the listener to make a decision for themselves as to what should have been done.
The son came to his senses and thought of a proposal for his father. He wanted to his father to take him as a servant, since his father’s servants had more than enough to eat and give. He had a deal. He went home thinking that he could do or say something to win (not the father’s affection) some semblance of the prosperous life he had, now as lowly servant. The story is about the father’s love. I think the son came to his senses after the father’s welcome. The father’s love is not conditional on the son’s repentance. The parable is after all about God’s radical love (especially to the listeners of that time, the Jewish teachers). Somewhere else in the bible, it says that it is God’s kindness that leads us to repentance.
this “deal” was pointed out to me by Malcolm Smith’s talk about Grace. It can be found on youtube under the title, “Grace vs Performance”.
this son was the ultimate wretch in the Jewish eyes, somewhat like the tax collectors and prostitutes that Jesus welcomed and sat with. He loved them. To the Jewish law-abiding mind, these people were so disgusting that ceremonial cleansing was necessary after contact with them. The son was the worst of the lot. He ate with pigs and gentiles. He was outside of God’s covenant according to the law. And yet, the father abases himself by running to, hugging, and kissing this disgusting creature. So are we to conclude this act of love was conditional (only possible) because the son had repented? I think that would disgraceful to the glory of God’s love. I agree with your other readers when they say that the son’s sincerity is irrelevant.
I think the repentance comes after the love of Christ. Was the son repentance sincere? Seems unlikely. Was the father’s love sincere, in spite of this? Yes.