INTRO
I got lazy, so I decided to allow you all to carry more of this lesson. It should be easy because I have selected two of the most familiar Parables for us to discuss. Pretty much everyone has heard these two parables in their American lives, especially in childhood. They were a staple of Sunday School since it was easy to tell the stories with felt boards. They even became ingrained in our language. Not a lot of time goes by until we hear some reference to “The Prodigal Son” or “The Good Samaritan”. In fact, Iron Faith supports Samaritan’s Purse, which is kind of funny, because the Parable of the Good Samaritan has nothing to do with a purse…Or, does it? Hmm, something to think about.
Both these Parables are in Luke, so it makes it easy for us to find them. But first, what is a Parable?
Anyone?
Anyone?
A parable literally means something cast alongside. Not like a net alongside a boat, but we could view it similarly. A person is explaining a truth and they cast aside a little story to better illustrate what they are saying, so we can say they cast alongside a net to catch a school of truths. Parables are short, very short, stories and they hold a secret as well. They would reveal the truths to those who wanted to know, but conceal the truth from those who didn’t care for the truth.
Our first little parable here is called “The Prodigal Son”, very familiar, but just in case you don’t know it, read Luke 15:11-32?
PIGS
The Parable of the Prodigal Son:
And he said, “There was a man who had two sons. And the
younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of property that is coming to me.’ And he divided his property between them.
This younger son probably spent nights wishing his father would drop dead. The way things will turn out it is well he didn’t get his wish.
First, when it came to inheritance in those times and in that place, the eldest son would have gotten the lion’s share. Deuteronomy 21:17 mentions this: but he shall acknowledge the firstborn, the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the firstfruits of his strength. The right of the firstborn is his.
Wait, were you paying attention?
The unloved, who was that?
The unloved, who was that?
We gotta be careful. When this references the son of the unloved, it indicates the man had sons by more than one woman. We don’t know whether the father in the parable had one wife or more, so maybe this doesn’t apply. This is why you don’t cherry pick Bible verses to fit your theory.
Still the eldest son would have inherited the bulk of the estate under the Jewish laws or traditions then.
However, the father would have held the rights on who inherited what and made it know in a will. It would have been considered offensive to the community that a son would dare demand his inheritance. The father would have been expected to refuse, and the older son should have come to the support of his father in such a case. The younger son was not only presumptuous in demanding his inheritance, but was basically breaking the law afterward by selling it and pocketing the money.
Not many days later, the younger son gathered all he had and took a journey into a far country, and there he squandered his property in reckless living. [We’ll find out what that reckless living was later? You want to guess?]
And when he had spent everything, a severe famine arose in 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 into his fields to feed pigs.
(Could he have went to the area of Gerasenes, the very place
where Jesus had driven a legion of demons out of a man, which then fled into a herd of pigs?)
And he was longing to be fed with the pods that the pigs ate, and no one gave him anything.
We think of pigs eating slop, but here it mentions pods. What were these pods fed to pigs?
They were the pods from the carob tree, also known as St. John’s Bread, locust tree or the Egyptian fig. They grow pods up to 12 inches long and 1 inch wide, filled with a soft brown pulp and around a dozen hard flat seeds. They taste sweet, but are fibrous. Natives grind them into a powder that is used to make imitation chocolate. They are sometimes called St. John’s Bread because some believe it was actually Carob Pods the Scriptures refer to as he ate locust.
They were the pods from the carob tree, also known as St. John’s Bread, locust tree or the Egyptian fig. They grow pods up to 12 inches long and 1 inch wide, filled with a soft brown pulp and around a dozen hard flat seeds. They taste sweet, but are fibrous. Natives grind them into a powder that is used to make imitation chocolate. They are sometimes called St. John’s Bread because some believe it was actually Carob Pods the Scriptures refer to as he ate locust.
“But when he came to himself, he said, ‘How many of my father's hired servants have more than enough bread, but I perish here with hunger! I will arise 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 as one of your hired servants.”’
And he arose and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion, and ran and embraced him and kissed him.
And 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 servants, ‘Bring quickly the best robe, and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet. And bring the fattened calf and kill it, and let us eat and celebrate. For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to celebrate.]
“Now his older son was in the field, and as he came and drew near to the house, he heard music and dancing. And he called one of the servants and asked what these things meant.
And he said to him, ‘Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fattened calf, because he has received him back safe and sound.’
But he was angry and refused to go in. His father came out and entreated him, but he answered his father, ‘Look, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed your command, yet you never gave me a young goat, that I might celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours came, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him!’
And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. It was fitting to celebrate and be glad, for this your brother was dead, and is alive; he was lost, and is found.’”
What is your impression of this tale?
Oh, before you start, perhaps you should understand what “prodigal” means. Often we refer to someone as a prodigal, but what exactly are we calling them?
[ A person who spends money in a recklessly extravagant way: spending money or resources freely and recklessly; wastefully extravagant.]
Who are the characters in this parable? Who or what do they represent? How do you feel about each?
Father
Eldest Son and heir.
Prodigar Son (Younger)
What was the theme of this parable? Was it not spoiling your children? Was it being careful what you do with your money?
What came before this parable? Who was Jesus directing it to?
See Luke 15:1-10:
See Luke 15:1-10:
Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.”
So he told them this parable: “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it? And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.’ Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.
“Or what woman, having ten silver coins, if she loses one coin, does not light a lamp and sweep the house and seek diligently until she finds it? And when she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbors, saying, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin that I had lost.’ Just so, I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents.”
The Parable of the Good Samaritan (Read Luke 10:25-37):
[Deuterononmy 6:5; 10:12; Matthew 22:37; Luke 10:27-37.]
But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead.
Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side.
Priests occupied an important and mostly well-regarded position in ancient Jewish society: they were trained not only in religious matters but also in Jewish law, literature, and tradition.
So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.
Levites were similar to priests in that they were a patrilineal, hereditary order and they worked in the temple. Their purity was important, too, but the rules regulating them were not as strict. Levites were not regarded as highly as priests for most of the Second Temple period (539 B.C.E.–70 C.E.); they are often described as a lower-level priesthood. They manned the temple gates, cleaned the temple, slaughtered some of the sacrificial animals, and performed the music during temple worship (1Chr 23-25).
In order to become a priest, one had to be the son of a priest and be pure in mind and body. (And according to the Pentateuch, priests were also said to be from the tribe of Levi.) It is likely, based on both biblical and Mesopotamian texts on priesthood, that every time a priest came to the temple to carry out his service there, his purity would have been tested by a group of priests and Levites who would probably have physically examined him (for skin diseases or broken bones) and made sure that there were no allegations of misconduct.
But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”
What is your impression of this story? Who are your neighbors? But what other scary implication does this story have for a Christian?
Think about this. What did the Samaritan spend on this stranger? He used the oil and wine he had with him to cleanse the man's wound and then bound these same wound, perhaps with part of his clothing. He took the man to an inn and paid 2 denarii to the innkeeper for a room and care. A denarii was typically one day of wages for 10 hours work. In today's value about $72.50. So the Samaritan paid $175 out of pocket to the innkeeper. But he told the innkeeper to spend how ever much was required to take care of the man and he would pay this back to the innkeeper. This was basically like handing the innkeeper a blank check. Would you be willing to pay such a sum for the care of a stranger, who was technically your enemy?
Is giving up all you may have to follow Jesus something scary? In Matthew 8:57-62 and Luke 14:25-33, Jesus spelled out the cost of following him.
Matthew 8:57-62 As they were going along the road, someone said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.” And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” To another he said, “Follow me.” But he said, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father.” And Jesus[g] said to him, “Leave the dead to bury their own dead. But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” Yet another said, “I will follow you, Lord, but let me first say farewell to those at my home.” Jesus said to him, “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.”
Luke 14:25-33 Now great crowds accompanied him, and he turned and said to them, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple. For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.’ Or what king, going out to encounter another king in war, will not sit down first and deliberate whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? And if not, while the other is yet a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks for terms of peace. So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.
SOME NOTES ON THE PRIESTS AND LEVITES
Exodus 32:26-29
Their zeal for the Lord caused the male Levites (except for Aaron's family, who were already designated as priests) to be set apart as caretakers of the tabernacle and as aides to the priests ( Num 1:47-53 )
The Levites were set apart but their status must still be seen as significantly different from that of the priests (even though all priests were Levites too). As aides, not officiating priests, theirs is an intermediate status between the people in general and that of the priesthood (i.e., the priests were made holy, the Levites were made clean; the priests were anointed and washed, the Levites were sprinkled; the priests were given new garments, the Levites washed theirs; blood was applied to the priests, but was waved over the Levites). The Levites were explicitly permitted to go near the Tent of Meeting, and this special privilege more than any other duty distinguished them from ordinary Israelites ( Num 8:19 ; 16:9-10 ).
Part of the support of the Levites was to come from the tithe they were to be allotted of the income of the other tribes ( Num 18:20-25 ). Since the reception of this tithe was dependent on the faithfulness of all the people, the financial position of the Levite was unpredictable. The Levites are therefore included in the legislation, along with the aliens, fatherless, and widows, as those whom the people must remember to care for ( Deut 12:19 ; 14:27-29 ).
In Deuteronomy, with a view to entering the land, the Levites were given an additional duty since their tabernacle transport obligations would be diminished. It was now the important duty of the Levites and the levitical priests, who would live throughout the land, to instruct the people in the law ( Deut 33:10 ).
Samaria (/səˈmɛəriə/;[1] Hebrew: שֹׁמְרוֹן, Standard Šomron, Tiberian Šōmərôn; Arabic: السامرة, as-Sāmirah – also known as Jibāl Nāblus, "Nablus Mountains") is a historical and biblical name used for the central region of ancient Land of Israel, also known as Palestine, bordered by Galilee to the north and Judaea to the south.[2][3] For the beginning of the Common Era, Josephus set the Mediterranean as its limit to the west, and the Jordan River to the east.[3] Its territory largely corresponds to the biblical allotments of the tribe of Ephraim and the western half of Manasseh; after the death of King Solomon and the splitting-up of his empire into the southern Kingdom of Judah and the northern one of Israel, this territory constituted the southern part of the Kingdom of Israel.[2] The border between Samaria and Judea is set at the latitude of Ramallah.[4]
The name "Samaria" is derived from the ancient city of Samaria, the second capital of the northern Kingdom of Israel.[5][6][7] The name likely began being used for the entire kingdom not long after the town of Samaria had become Israel's capital, but it is first documented after its conquest by Sargon II of Assyria, who turned the kingdom into the province of Samerina.[5]
Samaria has been revived as an administrative term in 1967, when the West Bank has been defined by Israeli officials as the Judea and Samaria Area,[8] of which the entire area north of the Jerusalem District is termed as Samaria.
Jordan ceded its claim to the area to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in August 1988.[9] In 1994, control of Areas 'A' (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority) and 'B' (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control) were transferred by Israel to the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority and the international community do not recognize the term "Samaria"; in modern times, the territory is generally known as part of the West Bank.[10]
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE SAMARITANS
The Samaritans occupied the country formerly belonging to the tribe of Ephraim and the half-tribe of Manasseh. The capital of the country was Samaria, formerly a large and splendid city. When the ten tribes were carried away into captivity to Assyria, the king of Assyria sent people from Cutha, Ava, Hamath, and Sepharvaim to inhabit Samaria (2 Kings 17:24; Ezra 4:2-11). These foreigners intermarried with the Israelite population that was still in and around Samaria. These “Samaritans” at first worshipped the idols of their own nations, but being troubled with lions, they supposed it was because they had not honored the God of that territory. A Jewish priest was therefore sent to them from Assyria to instruct them in the Jewish religion. They were instructed from the books of Moses, but still retained many of their idolatrous customs. The Samaritans embraced a religion that was a mixture of Judaism and idolatry (2 Kings 17:26-28). Because the Israelite inhabitants of Samaria had intermarried with the foreigners and adopted their idolatrous religion, Samaritans were generally considered “half-breeds” and were universally despised by the Jews.
Additional grounds for animosity between the Israelites and Samaritans were the following:
1. The Jews, after their return from Babylon, began rebuilding their temple. While Nehemiah was engaged in building the walls of Jerusalem, the Samaritans vigorously attempted to halt the undertaking (Nehemiah 6:1-14).
2. The Samaritans built a temple for themselves on “Mount Gerizim,” which the Samaritans insisted was designated by Moses as the place where the nation should worship. Sanballat, the leader of the Samaritans, established his son-in-law, Manasses, as high priest. The idolatrous religion of the Samaritans thus became perpetuated.
3. Samaria became a place of refuge for all the outlaws of Judea (Joshua 20:6-7; 21:21). The Samaritans willingly received Jewish criminals and refugees from justice. The violators of the Jewish laws, and those who had been excommunicated, found safety for themselves in Samaria, greatly increasing the hatred which existed between the two nations.
4. The Samaritans received only the five books of Moses and rejected the writings of the prophets and all the Jewish traditions.
From these causes arose an irreconcilable difference between them, so that the Jews regarded the Samaritans as the worst of the human race (John 8:48) and had no dealings with them (John 4:9). In spite of the hatred between the Jews and the Samaritans, Jesus broke down the barriers between them, preaching the gospel of peace to the Samaritans (John 4:6-26), and the apostles later followed His example (Acts 8:25).
No comments:
Post a Comment