Ask Me Help Desk - The Older Brother

The Older Brother

My current trip through the Greek New Testament has me in luke 15, the Prodigal Son story. At least one scholar calls it the Parable of the Older Brother because he thinks that's the main focus of the story. In any case, the wayward son comes back. His father throws the party to end all parties.
The older brother hears from the field and comes to find out what's going on. When he learns about his brother, he throws a hissy fit.
My question: why didn't he already know? Why didn't his father call him from the field the instant he saw his other son? Why was he left in the dark and had to go around asking somebody what was going on?
I mean, I know it ruins the story if he does, but besides that...
Thoughts?

This isn't my own answer, but an interesting explanation I've never heard, involving legalism:

http://micahcobb.com/blog/the-older-...-prodigal-son/

I think it's a simple comparison of the state of mind of the Pharisees with that of Christ.

The party is in heaven, thus not here before us, and when the Pharisees complain about Christ sitting with sinners He gives them this along with the coins and sheep.

It's not as if knowing about the party that mattered, the party should be expected in any case, the issue is the anger derived. It shows a misunderstanding of the character of the father.

The jealousy is unwarranted. If I have given you a kingdom and you toiled to make it wonderful, and then I gave another man a party for simply joining this kingdom, would it be justified to be jealous? Whether or not you were invited?

After a sufficient time, that son would be invited to all the parties. After his toil here is complete he would have sat at the right hand of God and celebrated with the angels at the salvation of sinners.

This parallels the other rebukes of the Pharisees, they always sought their reward now, sought praise for their good works.

I like infojunkie's take.

It's a bit deeper than the usual take, but not SO deep as to get lost in analyzing the parable. Anyway, I never thought of it as Christ explaining (again!) the Kingdom of Heaven, although I should have. I thought of it as life here-and-now, so to speak. When you think of it the way infojunkie said - and probably how Jesus intended - it resonates more profoundly.

I'm probably revealing my shallowness with my comment, but it feels good to gain a new insight into the Gospel. Funny how rereading the Gospels seems to offer never-ending insights into important meanings.

Good post, DW.

And infojunkie's untangling of the story answers my friend's anger as to how lifelong sinners make it into heaven ("the welcome home party") with a last-minute death-bed confession while the lifelong Christian gets ignored.

I too like infojunkie's analysis, and it gives me lots of good insights I didn't have before. My only question about it is, it assumes the older brother knew about his brother's return and the party. If he was working off in a field I'm not sure how he would know unless his father sent a messenger to tell him. In what we have of the story at least, that doesn't seem to have been the case. The way Jesus tells it, the older brother just came in from work and saw what was happening. When he asked, someone explained to him that his brother had come back. If the party was in full swing, it seems to me (I emphasize that part) that someone should have told him already. I'm wondering why they didn't.

Thanks for all the great responses!

And WG, as for your friend's question about deathbed conversions, I think ClassyT could answer that one as well as I can: Grace.

If we're to continue the analogy, it is not that someone should have told him that the party was happening, for he is close by and should have known, he should not have been surprised that there was a party on the occasion of the brother's return.

The character of the father is being called into question. At the beginning of Luke 15 the Pharisees were grumbling saying look at this man (whom they wouldn't have even noticed except that he was being recognized as a great teacher) he sits with the drunkards and tax collectors. These are the people who most wouldn't even talk to because it would seem as if they were consorting with them, partaking of the same sins.

This character should be known. Given the great scriptural knowledge of the Pharisees (or the intamacy of a son in the parable), they would be aware of such character, or maybe they just never really paid attention to the mercy of the father.

The entire Old Testament is the same story repeated of the Jews rejecting God for the worship of idols and the exuberant lifestyles. Only to be opressed by some foreigner or another in their weakened and Godless state, then crying out to God and being saved from absolute anhilation. God shows mercy on the righteous and repentant. Deuteronomy 30 is a great example.

There are stories throughout the Old Testament where where God is merciful and taking delight is the righteousness of man.

Job 33:26He shall pray to God, and He will delight in him,
He shall see His face with joy,
For He restores to man His righteousness.

Psalms 86:5For You, Lord, are good, and ready to forgive,
And abundant in mercy to all those who call upon You.

Jeremiah 31:3-4The Lord has appeared of old to me, saying:
“Yes, I have loved you with an everlasting love;
Therefore with lovingkindness I have drawn you.
Again I will build you, and you shall be rebuilt,
O virgin of Israel!
You shall again be adorned with your tambourines,
And shall go forth in the dances of those who rejoice.

Furthermore I like how Darby expounds on this aspect

"The servants are ordered to bring the best robe and put it on him. Thus loved, and received by love, in our wretchedness, we are clothed with Christ to enter the house. We do not bring the robe: God supplies us with it. It is an entirely new thing; and we become the righteousness of God in Him. This is heaven's best robe. All the rest have part in the joy, except the self righteous man, the true Jew. The joy is the joy of the father, but all the house shares it. The elder son is not in the house. He is near it, but he will not come in. He will have nothing to do with the grace that makes the poor prodigal the subject of the joy of love."

Quote:

from Darby: "...The elder son is not in the house. He is near it, but he will not come in. He will have nothing to do with the grace that makes the poor prodigal the subject of the joy of love."

The elder son was away, out in the field. He didn't know his younger brother had returned. Darby is incorrect.

Luke 15

25 “Now his older son was in the field. And as he came and drew near to the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 So he called one of the servants and asked what these things meant. 27 And he said to him, ‘Your brother has come, and because he has received him safe and sound, your father has killed the fatted calf.’

28 “But he was angry and would not go in. Therefore his father came out and pleaded with him. 29 So he answered and said to his father, ‘Lo, these many years I have been serving you; I never transgressed your commandment at any time; and yet you never gave me a young goat, that I might make merry with my friends. 30 But as soon as this son of yours came, who has devoured your livelihood with harlots, you killed the fatted calf for him.’

31 “And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that I have is yours. 32 It was right that we should make merry and be glad, for your brother was dead and is alive again, and was lost and is found.’ ”

Excellent, infojunkie! (Note to WG: Reread the parable more carefully.)

Plus, the father reassured the older son in verse 31, “And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that I have is yours."

25 “Now his older son was in the field. And as he came and drew near to the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 So he called one of the servants and asked what these things meant.

The older brother got angry and wouldn't go in, but not until after he found out what was going on. He had to come back to the house and ask a servant what all the hoopla was.

That's the question.

..Who knows? The Father was so very happy to have his son home he started getting ready to party. He knew the elder son would be back to enjoy the festivities. OR perhaps the Father was very much aware of how unhappy the elder son was going to be. After all, he worked and toiled for his Father and was the "good" son. The spirit of a Pharisee is very obvious and not fun to deal with. Maybe he didn't want his JOY ruined. The point is.....when the elder son DID come in from the field and saw all the wonderful grace the Father was showering on the younger brother...he was given a choice. Come in and enjoy because all things were his as well. Or be resentful and mad because he believed a son must follow the rules and work for his Father's love. I think the entire story is all about the FATHER...the lavish Father and obviously, Jesus told the story to make the Pharisee's understand it isn't about working and following rules in order to receive the Father's love. We never find out if the son went in or not. He was given TRUTH and it was up to him to take is or walk away. Just like the ones he was trying to reach the day he told the parable.

Chad Bird's take on this:

"The older brother thought erroneously that he and his younger brother were competing for their father's affections. He assumed that he deserved more of it. It seemed to him that his dad was playing favorites and giving away all his love to his brother. But the father reminded him that each child, while fully beloved, is loved differently. And even in that mild rebuke, the father was loving his oldest son toward a greater clarity of what love is and does."
From https://www.1517.org/articles/god-do...ryone-the-same

Good post and interesting thoughts. I heard someone from the Ravi Zacharias group (don't recall his name) talk about that parable. He said that as Jesus described the initial action of the younger son in asking for his inheritance and the final action of the older son in refusing t come in, it would have been shocking to the Jews of that day to hear of sons disobeying and disrepecting their father. I have also thought about the younger son's confession that he was no longer "worthy" to be his son. It is, I believe, the key to the presence of God. "I am not worthy. I am completely dependent on your mercy and lovingkindness." The older son never understood that. As Psalm 51 says, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise."

Interesting, but I don't personally believe the younger son actually thought he was no longer "worthy". The younger son was just starving....it never says he felt unworthy, or that he even felt bad about his sins. What the bible records is he was starving so he started thinking his father had bread enough and to spare. Therefore he rehearsed something to tell his Father so he could go back and eat even if he was merely a servant. To ME this is why the parable is so amazing...all the Father cared about is that his son came home. Do I think the younger son eventually did repent? Oh yeah, but in my view that didn't happen until his Father lavished him with GRACE. See? Its the goodness of God that causes us to repent. That's my thoughts.

His statement was that he was not worthy. That was the conclusion he arrived at in the story. As to what he was thinking, it was a parable, and he is a fictional character, so that is speculative. At any rate, God loves us and moves to rescue and bless us, not because we are worthy, but because He is love, and thank God for that. Romans 3 makes it clear that we are not good nor worthy. I certainly agree with you that it is His goodness that moves us to repentance, and that His grace is indeed a wonderful and amazing thing.

True! But his motivation was his tummy. That is how I read it, anyway.

It can sure be a powerful wake-up call!

It seems to have been a tad more than his stomach, since the text says he "came to his senses" and made his decision.
Still, it's true that hunger is a powerful motivator.

Yes. It certainly seems that he did not merely change his actions, but that he was changed. He went from arrogant to humble, and from a position of "I deserve" to "I am not worthy".

When doing my Fun Trivia Quiz just now, one of the questions had to do with the Prodigal Son story. I answered correctly and noticed this paragraph that was part of FT's explanation for the answer:

"Christians generally take this story as a description of how the heavenly Father feels over the salvation of lost souls. Someone who has attended church all their lives might feel a twinge of this same type of resentment when a sinner suddenly converts and is welcomed into Christianity, but as this text points out, that is likely an incorrect attitude. The underlying theme seems to be that joy should be felt, rather than resentment."

Quote:

The underlying theme seems to be that joy should be felt, rather than resentment."

That is certainly true. When a sinner converts, we should be joyful. I guess I've never observed it to be otherwise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

That is certainly true. When a sinner converts, we should be joyful. I guess I've never observed it to be otherwise.

Long ago, a dear friend who was very active in the congregation we belonged to, frustratedly said, "So I spend my entire life being faithful to God and His Word, accepting His Son as my beloved Savior, do good works as much as I am able in order to thank God for His mercy to me. Then a person who has made no effort to live a God-pleasing life is on his deathbed, cries out 'I believe in You, Jesus!' and is saved? I'm supposed to be joyful about that???"

That is regrettable. Like I said, I have never observed that. I have observed, on fairly rare occasions, people being harsh towards a particular "variety" of sinners. That is likewise regrettable.

I think her point was that she could live her life any way she pleased and finally, on her deathbed, accept Jesus as Savior and be saved? So why bother with years of going to church and Bible class and belonging to church groups when she could have been doing more fun things.

Quote:

I think her point was that she could live her life any way she pleased and finally, on her deathbed, accept Jesus as Savior and be saved? So why bother with years of going to church and Bible class and belonging to church groups when she could have been doing more fun things.

The problem with that is the fact that many people do not die on their deathbed. Besides, I would ten times rather live my life as a Christian than any other way. I would be a Christian even if there was no heaven/hell.

WG, you have asked before about the fate of children that die. Just read tonight in 2 Sam. 12:23 that David said, "He cannot come to me, but I shall go to him." That would certainly seem to show that the child was in heaven, would it not?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

WG, you have asked before about the fate of children that die. Just read tonight in 2 Sam. 12:23 that David said, "He cannot come to me, but I shall go to him." That would certainly seem to show that the child was in heaven, would it not?

God caused an innocent baby to die in order to punish David, the father of that baby???

That's certainly what the text says. Children suffer for the misdeeds of their parents.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

That's certainly what the text says. Children suffer for the misdeeds of their parents.

Yes, that's true, but God makes that happen? I hope not!

Well, it's what the text reads.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Well, it's what the text reads.

So then, why would God object to abortion?

God's judgment is one thing. Man's murder is entirely different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

God's judgment is one thing. Man's murder is entirely different.

Then He should have killed David, the guilty one, not an innocent baby.

You'll have to talk with God about that one. I didn't make that decision. But I am surprised to see you refer to an "innocent baby", and be upset with God, and yet have no problem supporting liberal dem politicians who kill countless innocent babies. You seem confused.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

But I am surprised to see you refer to an "innocent baby", and be upset with God, and yet have no problem supporting liberal dem politicians who kill countless innocent babies. You seem confused.

I have not done that. All I have said is that a woman and her doctor should make that decision together.

Well then, God did what you say it’s ok for a doctor to do. What is your complaint?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Well then, God did what you say it’s ok for a doctor to do. What is your complaint?

I didn't say "it's ok for a doctor to do"!

Quote:

All I have said is that a woman and her doctor should make that decision together.

And thus you have given your permission.

You really don't think that "a woman and her doctor" will always decide to preserve the unborn child's life, do you? You seem to be one of those people who want to vote for pro-abortion candidates, but then try to pretend that you really don't support abortion. Well, you can't have it both ways.