CYPRESSWOOD CHURCH OF CHRIST

March 26, 2006

CONTINUE TO REMEMBER THE FOLLOWING:

Our congregation                                                                 Various friends, relatives and co-workers

Our nation, military and leaders                                         James and Leon in the Army

Our students

CONGRATULATIONS: to Marcus and Kerrie at the birth of their son, Logan, last Monday at noon.

COMING UP:

   Today is Coco’s baby shower at 3 P.M.

   On April 30^th, we are invited to the King’s after the assembly for lunch and a shower/party for Travis and Rose.

LOST SHEEP, COINS AND SONS

(part 1)

“Now the tax collectors and sinners were all gathering around to hear Jesus.  But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, ‘This man welcomes sinners and eats with them’” (Luke 15:1-2).

One of the most familiar texts of scripture is the parable of the Prodigal or Lost Son.  Occasionally one will hear a reference to a prodigal, and a Biblically literate people would catch the reference, though the idea is familiar enough that some would miss it.  I’ve preached sermons on this text because it is rich in material.  We have often talked about the joy of the return of the lost son and the reuniting with his father, equating it with the return of a repentant sinner to God.  While there is truth in this, is there more meaning to the parable?  What might we have missed in the story Jesus told because of the culture of His day?

Kenneth E. Bailey has written a book called The Cross & the Prodigal (IVP, 2005).  It is subtitled “Luke 15 Through the Eyes of Middle Eastern Peasants.”  We live in a culture different from the days of Jesus and have missed some of the nuances that are presented in the parable.  Bailey has lived, studied, and preached in the Middle East, especially on this text, and has learned valuable lessons that will aid in understanding this parable.  He went to villages where he observed the life, often unchanged for two thousand years.  He studied Arabic and other Middle Eastern translations of the Bible as well as commentaries. 

The parable itself is found in the context of Jesus setting His eyes on His mission of going to Jerusalem (Luke 9-19).  The audience is important to understand.  There was Jesus, tax collectors, sinners, Pharisees, and teachers of the law.  Tax collectors were not only sinners but collaborators with the Imperial Roman Empire.  As such they were despised.  Hired out to collect certain amounts of money, anything beyond that was theirs.  Needless to say, corruption and abuse was common place.  They were also linked with the Gentiles, which in Jesus’ day was divisive.  Today we see efforts made to link one group or another to the extreme right wing fundamentalists or the extreme left wing anti-capitalists.   The sinners were considered unclean, breakers of the law, and of low moral character in the eyes of the Pharisees. 

The issue for the Pharisees was that Jesus met and ate with sinners.  This caused them to “mutter” or “murmur” either under their voices or through the crowd, a discontented complaining toward Jesus.  The word for “mutter” or “murmur” is the same word used at least six times in the Old Testament of the people murmuring against Moses.  The word “welcome” does not mean receive but to welcome into fellowship as a friend, similar to what we see in Christian circles (Romans 16:2; Philippians 2:29).  Jesus also ate with them, which in the culture meant an act of acceptance at a very deep level.  A religious leader doing so added the idea of a blessing by his presence. 

“Then Jesus told them this parable.”  He was talking specifically to the Pharisees though the others were definitely listening.  We have often seen this section as three parables but it might be more important to see it as three illustrations leading to the final point.  The first part of the parable was about a shepherd and a lost sheep.  Pharisees were not paid to teach the law so they had a secular professions.  Paul was a tent maker and Jesus was a carpenter.  They were working men.  However the Pharisees considered shepherds “people of the land” and unclean, and had nothing to do with them. 

One hundred sheep represented wealth.  It can refer to either ownership or to one who was responsible for the sheep.  Shepherds were simple and poor.  If one sheep was lost, the Pharisees would have expected Jesus to say that the owner sent a servant to tell the shepherd to find the sheep or lose his job.  But He doesn’t do that.  He says, “If he has lost one of them.“  In Arabic translations, according to Bailey, “in the past have turned this into a passive to read ‘If one of them is lost’ because at both ends of the Mediterranean the speaker never blames himself (p. 30).  It is illustrated by not saying “I missed the train” but by saying “The train left me.”  Jesus broke this common speech pattern by placing the responsibility on the shepherd.  According to Bailey, Jesus is saying “You lost your sheep.  I went after it and brought it home.  Now you have the gall to come to me complaining!  Don’t you realize that I am making up for your mistakes?” (p. 31). 

The shepherd leaves ninety nine alone to go after the one.  Should the one be sacrificed for the good of the many?  That has been a debated topic.  The shepherd was willing to pay a high price to find the one.  He would have to spend time searching for the one sheep, climbing over rocks and rugged wilderness.  We are not told how long it took but after two days, today’s Middles Eastern shepherds would consider it dead. 

“And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home.”  The easy part was finding the sheep, who would most likely be huddled under a bush, dazed and waiting.  He would now put it on his shoulder and climb back over the rugged territory to home.  This is not a lamb as pictured in Isaiah 40:11.  Rather, this is a full size sheep.  The shepherd would carry it on his shoulders with the stomach against his neck, and the four feet tied together in front of his face.  There are several statues and other artistic presentations with this exact idea shown. 

The shepherd returned to the village or community.  One of the interesting things is that the flock could be partly owned by friends and neighbors.  In a village society, one block of houses could include ten to twenty families, all related.  The sheep provide wool for the winter, so there would be concern by the whole community for the flock.  Needless to say, there is a great lesson in this that can and should be applied to the church, and something the Pharisees missed.  The family would sustain the loss and would come together in rejoicing when it is found.  The shepherd would receive a hero’s welcome from his friends.  The word “friend” has an interesting role with the Pharisees.  They formed into clubs in the villages that were called “friends.”  Jesus is saying to them, “You are the Friends, and you should rejoice with me when I find a lost sheep, just as the friends of the shepherd in my parable rejoice with him” (p. 33, footnote 10). 

The Pharisees were the shepherds of Israel.  Jesus is holding them responsible for the sheep of their community, the very tax collectors and sinners that they murmured about.  We can certainly apply this to the church and its leaders.  Four lessons from this portion of the parable.  1) The shepherd accepts responsibility for the loss.  That certainly is a powerful thought.  Like people anywhere, it is difficult to accept the responsibility for the actions of others, yet God does in Christ.  This opens up for us a deeper meaning of Psalm 23, “The Lord is my Shepherd.”  2) The shepherd searches without counting the cost.  Discussions happen often concerning this: go where the sinners are.  Should we go to a bar where “sinners” are?  What type of example is that for others?  Should we eat with homosexuals and prostitutes?  That would be wrong, wouldn’t it?  Who then are we sounding like in making such arguments?  Yes, I’m uncomfortable with such ideas, but then if one wants to be like Jesus…?  3) The shepherd rejoices at the burden of restoration.  No one said it would be easy, and maybe that is why few try.  G.K. Chesterton said, “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”  There is a burden in restoration, of going, of patience, and of humility (see 2 Timothy 4:2).  It is not to win a debate or judge someone.  We do not hear Jesus saying something like “you stupid sheep, what’s the matter with you.  Why didn’t you just stay home.  You know how much time I’ve wasted finding you.  I ought to beat the tar out of you.”  Rather, there is joy!  4) The shepherd and the community rejoice.  Our assemblies just are not geared to rejoicing, or at least, we have not seen it that way.  A person responds to the invitation, asks to be restored, we say a prayer, sing a song, make announcements, and go.  What if we took time to rejoice, to gather around the “prodigal” who has returned, sing and pray?  We have adapted too much to the clock that going past a certain time just isn’t acceptable, and we miss something.  And maybe we just see that the one should not be a burden on the many.

This is just the first part of the parable.  We will look at the second one next.  Hopefully we can see that aspects of the culture contribute to an understanding of the text that we have not completely grasped.

                                                                                                                                George B. Means