Luca 15:29 Commento

Evil manners, we say, beget good laws; so, in this chapter, the murmuring of the scribes and Pharisees at the grace of Christ, and the favour he showed to publicans and sinners, gave occasion for a more full discovery of that grace than perhaps otherwise we should have had in these three parables which we have in this chapter, the scope of all of which is the same, to show, not only what God had said and sworn in the Old Testament, that he had no pleasure in the death and ruin of sinners, but that he had great pleasure in their return and repentance, and rejoices in the gracious entertainment he gives them thereupon. Here is, I. The offence which the Pharisees took at Christ for conversing with heathen men and publicans, and preaching his gospel to them (Luk 15:1, Luk 15:2). II. His justifying himself in it, by the design and proper tendency of it, which with many had been the effect of it, and that was, the bringing of them to repent and reform their lives, than which there could not be a more pleasing and acceptable service done to God, which he shows in the parables, 1. Of the lost sheep that was brought home with joy (Luk 15:4-7). 2. Of the lost silver that was found with joy (Luk 15:8-10). 3. Of the lost son that had been a prodigal, but returned to his father's house, and was received with great joy, though his elder brother, like these scribes and Pharisees, was offended at it (v. 11-32).

Then drew near to him,.... To "Jesus", as the Persic and Ethiopic versions express it: this was on the sabbath day, and either when he was in the Pharisee's house, where he was invited to dinner, Luk 14:1 or rather when he came out of it, when the multitude, who could not come near him whilst there, took the opportunity of gathering about him; even all the publicans and sinners; whom the Pharisee would not admit into his house, it being contrary to their traditions to eat, and drink, and converse with persons of such an infamous character; See Gill on Mat 9:10, Mat 9:11 The word "all" is omitted in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions; but the Arabic version has it, and the Greek copies; and signifies that there were a very large number of them, even all that were in that place, and in the adjacent cities and towns, that got together for to hear him, or "from him", as the Arabic version; or "doctrine" from him, as the Persic version adds: these having heard much of him; and it may be, might be under some remorse of conscience on account of their vicious lives, came to hear him preach.

And he answering, said to his father,.... Commending himself, and reflecting on his father: lo, these many years do I serve thee; for though he was called a son, yet differed little from a servant; he was of a servile disposition, and under a spirit of bondage; he served his father, not in the Gospel, but in the law, moral and ceremonial; in the letter of it, and not in the newness of the Spirit; externally, and not internally; from fear, and not from love; with mercenary views, and not freely; with trust in, and dependence on his service, seeking justification and eternal life by it, and not with a view to the glory of God; and this he had done "many years"; from his youth upwards, as the Pharisee in Mat 19:20 whereas his younger brother had never served him, but his own lusts; and yet as soon as ever he was come home, before he could enter upon service, this entertainment was made for him, and which he therefore resented: moreover, he does not say I have served thee, but "I do"; denoting the continuance and constancy of his service; and intimating that his life had been, and was one continued series of obedience: neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment; which though true of the elect angels, can never be said of any of the sons of men; and which shows, that he had never been under a work of the Spirit of God, who convinces of sin; and had never seen himself in a true light, in the glass of that law, he pretended to serve God in; that he was a stranger to the plague of his own heart, and was a self-deceiver, and the truth of grace was not in him: he could not be a good man, for so to say, is contrary to the experience of all good men; to their groans, complaints, and confessions; to their prayers, for fresh application of pardoning grace; and to the observation of all wise and good men in all ages; and most fully proves him to be, a Pharisee: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends; some by a "kid", or "goat", as Theophylact, understand a persecutor, as Saul was of David, and Ahab of Elijah; and so means that God had not delivered up such an one into his hands; or took him away by death, that he might have some peace and rest, amidst his labours and service; and others understand this of the Jews, desiring Barabbas, a goat, and not Jesus, the Lamb of God; but his meaning seems to be, that he had never received any favour in proportion to the services he had done; and so charges his father with ingratitude.

He, then, will receive you, His own son, back, even if you have squandered what you had received from Him, even if you return naked-just because you have returned; and will joy more over your return than over the sobriety of the other; but only if you heartily repent-if you compare your own hunger with the plenty of your Father's "hired servants"-if you leave behind you the swine, that unclean herd-if you again seek your Father, offended though He be, saying, "I have sinned, nor am worthy any longer to be called Thine.

The Jew requires a kid, the Christian a lamb, and therefore is Barabbas released to them, to us a lamb is sacrificed. Which thing also is seen in the kid, because the Jews have lost the ancient rite of sacrifice. Or they who seek for a kid wait for Antichrist. Now the shameless son is like to the Pharisee justifying himself. Because he had kept the law in the letter, he wickedly accused his brother for having wasted his father's substance with harlots. For it follows, But as soon as this thy son is come, who hath devoured thy living, &c.

(Hom. 64. in Matt.) But it is asked, whether one who grieves at the prosperity of others is affected by the passion of envy. We must answer, that no Saint grieves at such things; but rather looks upon the good things of others as his own. Now we must not take every thing contained in the parable literally, but bringing out the meaning which the author had in view, search for nothing farther. This parable then was written to the end that sinners should not despair of returning, knowing that they shall obtain great things. Therefore he introduces others so troubled at these good things as to be consumed with envy, but those who return, treated with such great honour as to become themselves an object of envy to others.

(in Ep. 21. ad Damasum.) Or he says, Thou never gavest me a kid, that is, no blood of prophet or priest has delivered us from the Roman power.

(ubi sup.) Or, in another way, all justice in comparison of the justice of God is injustice. Therefore Paul says, Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? (Rom. 7:24.) and hence were the Apostles moved with anger at the request of the sons of Zebedee. (Matt. 20:24.)

Next the answer of the elder son involves two questions; for it follows, And he answering said to his father, Lo these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment. With respect to the commandment not transgressed, it at once occurs, that it was not spoken of every command, but of that most essential one, that is, that he was seen to worship no other God but one, the Creator of all. Nor is that son to be understood to represent all Israelites, but those who have never turned from God to idols. For although he might desire earthly things, yet sought he them from God alone, though in common with sinners. Hence it is said, I was as a beast before thee, and I am always with thee. (Ps. 7, 22.) But who is the kid which he never received to make merry upon? for it follows, Thou never gavest me a kid, &c. Under the name of a kid the sinner may be signified. But I do not see the object of this interpretation, for it is very absurd for him to whom it is afterwards said, Thou art ever with me, to have wished for this from his father, i. e. to believe in Antichrist. Nor altogether can we rightly understand any of the Jews who are to believe in Antichrist to be that son. And how could he feast upon that kid which is Antichrist who did not believe in him? But if to feast upon the slain kid, is the same as to rejoice at the destruction of Antichrist, how does the son whom the father did not entertain say that this was never given him, seeing that all the sons will rejoice at his destruction? His complaint then is, that the Lord Himself was denied him to feast upon, because he deems Him a sinner. For since He is a kid to that nation which regards Him as a violater and profaner of the Sabbath, it was not meet that they should be made merry at his banquet. But his words with my friends are understood according to the relation of the chiefs with the people, or of the people of Jerusalem with the other nations of Judæa. (ubi sup.) The harlots are the superstitions of the Gentiles, with whom he wastes his substance, who having left the true marriage of the true God, goes a whoring after evil spirits from foul desire.

Which we also ourselves sometimes feel; for some live a most excellent and perfect life, another off time even in his old age is converted to God, or perhaps when just about to close his last day, through God's mercy washes away his guilt. But this mercy some men reject from restless timidity of mind, not counting upon the will of our Saviour, who rejoices in the salvation of those who are perishing.

If anyone says that the virtuous and sober son signifies Israel according to the flesh, we cannot agree to this opinion. In no way is it fitting to say that Israel chose a blameless life. Throughout the whole inspired Scripture, we see them accused of being rebels and disobedient.…I think it is right to mention this also. Some refer to the person of our Savior as that fatted calf that the father killed when his son was called to conversion.… If any one imagines that the virtuous and sober son means the physical Israel, how can Israel honestly say that he never gave him a kid? Whether we call it calf or kid, Christ is to be understood as the sacrifice offered for sin. He was not sacrificed only for the Gentiles but also that he might redeem Israel, who by reason of his frequent transgression of the law had brought great blame on himself. The wise Paul bears witness to this, saying, “For this reason Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people by his blood, suffered outside the gate.”

But he, answering, said to his father: Behold, all these years I have served you, and I never disobeyed your command. The question arises how that people could be said to have never disobeyed God's command. But it is easily resolved that this was not said about every command, but about the one most necessary, by which they were commanded to worship no other God. Neither should this son be understood as representing all Israelites, but those who have never turned from the one God to idols. For although this son, placed as if in a field, desired earthly things, he desired these goods from the one God. This is also confirmed by the testimony of his father when he says: You are always with me. For he does not refute him as if he were lying, but approving his perseverance with him, invites him to the enjoyment of a greater and more delightful celebration.

And you never gave me a young goat so that I might celebrate with my friends. Certainly, a sinner is usually signified by the name of the young goat, but far be it from me to understand the Antichrist. For it is quite absurd that it is said to him. You are always with me, having wished this from the father, that he would believe in the Antichrist. Nor is it at all proper to understand this son in the people of the Jews, who are going to believe in the Antichrist. But how would he feast from that goat if he himself is the Antichrist, who would not believe in him? Or if this is to feast from the slaughter of the goat, which is to rejoice at the destruction of the Antichrist, how does the son, whom the father receives, say that this was not granted to him, when all the sons of God are going to rejoice at the damnation of that adversary? Surely, therefore, he complains that the Lord Himself is denied to him for joining, while he considers Him a sinner. For when the goat is of that nation, that is, when he considers Him a violator of the Sabbath and a transgressor of the law, he did not deserve to rejoice in His feasts. So that what he says: You never gave me a young goat so that I might celebrate with my friends, is as if he were saying, him who seemed a goat to me, you never gave me to feast upon, thus denying me him himself by that very thing by which he seemed a goat to me. But what he says, With my friends, either it is understood from the perspective of the leaders, with the people, or from the perspective of the people of Jerusalem, with the other peoples of Judea.

Here they raise the well-known question: how is it that the son who in all other respects lived and served his father in a pleasing manner turns out to be envious? But the question will be resolved as soon as one considers why this parable was told. This parable, together with the preceding ones, was told, without doubt, because the Pharisees, who considered themselves pure and righteous, murmured against the Lord for receiving harlots and tax collectors. And if it was told because the Pharisees murmured — they who appeared to be more righteous than the tax collectors — then observe that the figure of the son who appears to murmur applies to all who are scandalized by the sudden good fortune and salvation of sinners. And this is not envy, but rather the outpouring of God's love for mankind, which is incomprehensible to us, and therefore gives rise to murmuring. Does not David also present people who are scandalized by the peace of sinners (Ps. 73:3)? Likewise Jeremiah, when he says: "Why does the way of the wicked prosper?" "You have planted them, and they have taken root" (Jer. 12:1–2). All this is characteristic of the weak and poor human mind, which is troubled and perplexed at the sight of unworthiness — namely, the prosperity of wicked people. Therefore the Lord, through the present parable, speaks as it were thus to the Pharisees: granted that you, like this son, are righteous and pleasing before the Father; but I ask you, righteous and pure as you are, not to murmur that we prepare a feast for the salvation of a sinner, for he too is a son. Thus what is revealed here is not envy, but by this parable the Lord instructs the Pharisees not to be vexed at the reception of sinners, even if they themselves are righteous and keep every commandment of God. And it is not at all surprising if we are grieved at the reception of those who seem unworthy. The love of God for mankind is so great and so abundantly bestows its blessings upon us that even murmuring can arise from it. So too we speak in ordinary conversation. Often, having done someone a kindness and then receiving no gratitude from him, we say: everyone reproaches me for having bestowed so many benefits upon you. Although perhaps no one has reproached us at all, wishing to show the greatness of the kindness, we invent this. Let us examine this parable part by part and, as it were, in a brief summary. "The elder son was in the field," that is, in this world, tilling his land, that is, the flesh, so that it might abound in bread, and sowing with tears so as to reap with joy (Ps. 125:5). Having learned of what had happened, he did not want to enter into the common joy. But the compassionate Father comes out, calls him, and informs him that the cause of the celebration is the revival of one who was dead — something the son did not know, being a man who takes offense and accuses the Father for not having given him "even a young goat," while for the profligate He slaughtered the fattened calf. What is signified by the "young goat"? You can learn from the fact that every goat is assigned to the left side, the side of sinners (Matt. 25:33, 41). So the virtuous son says to the Father: I spent my life in every kind of toil, endured persecutions, troubles, and insults from sinners, and You never slaughtered or killed a young goat for me — that is, a sinner who offended me — so that I might find a little pleasure. For example, Ahab was a goat in relation to Elijah. He persecuted the prophet, but the Lord did not immediately deliver this goat to slaughter so as to bring some small joy to Elijah and give rest to him along with his friends the prophets. Therefore Elijah says to God: "They have torn down Your altars and killed Your prophets" (1 Kings 19:14). In relation to David, the goat was Saul and all who slandered him, whom the Lord allowed to tempt him but did not kill for David's pleasure. Therefore David says: "How long, O Lord, shall the wicked, how long shall the wicked triumph?" (Ps. 94:3). So also this son presented in the Gospel says: the one who labors constantly, him You did not deem worthy of any consolation, nor did You even deliver to slaughter any of those who offended me, yet now, without any effort, You save the profligate! Thus the entire purpose of this parable, told on account of the Pharisees' grumbling against the Lord for His reception of sinners, is to teach us not to reject sinners and not to grumble when God receives them, even if we ourselves are righteous. The younger son represents the harlots and tax collectors; the elder son represents the Pharisees and scribes, who are supposedly regarded as righteous. God says, as it were: granted that you are indeed righteous and have transgressed no commandment, but surely those who turn from evil ought to be received? It is murmurers such as these that the Lord instructs through the present parable. It is not unknown to me that some understood the elder son as referring to Angels, and the younger to human nature, which rebelled and did not submit to the given commandment. Others understood the elder as the Israelites, and the younger as the Gentiles. But what we have just said is true, namely: that the elder son represents the person of the righteous, and the younger that of sinners and the repentant, and the entire construction of the parable was composed on account of the Pharisees, whom the Lord impresses upon that they, even if they themselves were righteous, should not be grieved by the acceptance of sinners. Therefore, let no one take offense at the judgments of God, but let him be patient even in the case when sinners, it would seem, are made prosperous and are saved. For how do you know? Perhaps the one whom you consider a sinner has offered repentance, and for that reason has been accepted. And it may also be that he has secret virtues, and on account of them is favorable in the eyes of God.

Or to take the whole differently; the character of the son who seems to complain is put for all those who are offended at the sudden advances and salvation of the perfect, as David introduces one who took offence at the peace of sinners. Or he was in the field, that is, in the world, pampering his own flesh, that he might be filled with bread, and sowing in tears that he might reap in joy, but when he found what was being done, he was unwilling to enter into the common joy. Or by this parable our Lord reproves the will of the Pharisees, whom according to the argument he terms just, as if to say, Let it be that you are truly just, having transgressed none of the commandments, must we then for this reason refuse to admit those who turn away from their iniquities? The son then says to the father, For nothing I left a life of sorrow, ever harassed by sinners who were my enemies, and never hast thou for my sake ordered a kid to be slain, (that is, a sinner who persecuted me,) that I might enjoy myself for a little. Such a kid was Ahab to Elijah, who said, Lord, they have killed thy prophets. (1 Kings 19:14.)

Publicans and sinners draw near to hear our Lord, at which the Pharisees are offended, Luk 15:1, Luk 15:2. Christ vindicates his conduct in receiving them by the parable of the lost sheep, Luk 15:3-7. The parable of the lost piece of money, Luk 15:8-10; and the affecting parable of the prodigal son, vv. 11-32.

Never - a kid - It is evident from Luk 15:12, that the father gave him his portion when his profligate brother claimed his; for he divided his whole substance between them. And though he had not claimed it, so as to separate from, and live independently of, his father, yet he might have done so whenever he chose; and therefore his complaining was both undutiful and unjust.

PUBLICANS AND SINNERS WELCOMED BY CHRIST--THREE PARABLES TO EXPLAIN THIS. (Luke 15:1-32) drew near . . . all the publicans and sinners, &c.--drawn around Him by the extraordinary adaptation of His teaching to their case, who, till He appeared--at least His forerunner--might well say, "No man careth for my soul."

these many years . . . neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment--The words are not to be pressed too far. He is merely contrasting his constancy of love and service with the conduct of his brother; just as Job, resenting the charge of hypocrisy by his friends, speaks as if nothing could be laid to his charge (Job 23:10-12), and David too (Psa 18:20-24). The father attests the truth of all he says. never . . . a kid--I say not a calf, but not even a kid. that I might make merry with my friends--Here lay his misapprehension. It was no entertainment for the gratification of the prodigal: it was a father's expression of the joy he felt at his recovery. thy son . . . thy living--How unworthy a reflection on the common father of both, for the one not only to disown the other, but fling him over upon his father, as if he should say, Take him, and have joy of him!