Prodigal Son and Father

I grew up thinking “prodigal” meant “sinful,” “adulterous,” “evil,” or “disobedient.” Only later did I realize prodigal meant “spending money or wealth lavishly,” perhaps recklessly. Finding that meaning, I agree that this story is rightfully called “The Prodigal Son,” but it should refer to the true Son of God, Jesus, the Prodigal Jesus.

I draw this conclusion from the opening lines:

"All the tax collectors and sinners were drawing near to him to hear him, and the Pharisees and the scribes were murmuring, saying, ‘This man receives sinners and eats with them.’" (15:1–2)

This was the same accusation the older brother made against the younger brother:

"When this son of yours, who ate your livelihood with prostitutes, came back." (15:30a)

The younger son partied with the prostitutes and ate up his father’s livelihood. That was the older brother’s perspective, not the reality; Jesus didn’t say that the younger son had a sinful lifestyle. That was what the older brother in the story assumed and accused his younger brother of. Similarly, from the Pharisees’ and scribes’ perspective, what Jesus did – receiving sinners and eating with them – amounted to such an immoral act. Jesus, however, received and ate with them because he came for the lost and not the righteous.

Preachers often say what the younger brother did – asking for his inheritance – was awful because it figuratively invoked the death of his father because inheritance was distributed only after one’s father died. Sadly, the text doesn’t say anything about inheritance (κληρονομία, klironomia). Instead, the younger brother asked the father for “the leftover portion of livelihood [ουσία, usia]” (5:12b). What I’ve translated as the leftover portion is το επιβάλλον μέρος (to epivallon meros), where the base βάλλω (vallo) meant “to throw” and the preposition επι (epi) meant “away.” The younger brother asked for the “throw away” or “leftover” portion of his father’s livelihood, not his inheritance or even livelihood. Two words refer to life in this story (ουσία [usia], βίον [vion] in v. 12 and βίον [vion] in v. 30). That was intentional: the Prodigal Son, Jesus, would lavishly spend the Father’s life with the sinners.

One other element in the story leads to the conclusion Jesus was the Prodigal Son: the father’s description of the son as he was speaking to the older brother:

“Your brother, this one, was dead and is alive; he was lost and found.” (15:32b)

True to the father’s words, the Prodigal Jesus was dead and became alive. He was separated from the Father on the cross and reunited at his resurrection.

But the story doesn’t end there; the Son was lavish with his wealth and life with sinners, tax collectors, and prostitutes because he had a great role model, his father:

"When this son of yours, who ate your livelihood with prostitutes, came back, you killed for him a fattened calf." (15:30)

The father, too, partied with the dead and alive son. The Heavenly Father, too, rejoiced when his Son spent time with sinners and tax collectors and offered them his life. Just as the shepherd rejoiced in finding his lost sheep and the lady rejoiced in finding her lost coin, the father rejoiced in finding his lost son, and the Heavenly Father rejoiced and rejoiced in the return of his Son and him with fellow sons and daughters – once sinners but now redeemed.