the role of the lukan parables in terms of the purpose of luke's gospel

20:12), as I have pointed out, the request for his share of the possessions, his covetousness,
his squandering, his lifestyle and his neglect of his father. It is better to consider all these
possibilities together, rather than discard any of them.
In the question as to whether the younger son’s confession and return are sincere acts of
repentance, Bailey argues that it is not repentance, for if so, then the parable is inconsistent
with the teaching of repentance in the two former parables as the acceptance of being
found. 105 Along the same lines, Kilgallen contends that it is merely his own self-interest to
get better food, as he has lived from the beginning of the story with his own interests in
view. 106 Even though there is certainly no mention of repentance in his monologue, it must
be recognized that his confession and change are at least sincere. 107
When the father sees at a distance his son coming home, with compassion, he runs to
meet the younger son and embraces him. According to Sir 19:30, walking posture had quite
an important meaning for a man. A dignified man, therefore, did not run. In addition, for
108
Oriental nobleman, running was shameful, because of the exposure of his legs. In spite of
such customs, the father runs to welcome his younger son, thereby astonishing the audiences
in the parable. Although the parable is in the tradition of Oriental custom, it must be
considered that such a custom can be broken in particular situations, such as that in the
parable, to put it in other words, the running in that situation at no point brings shame to the
father. 109
What here allows for afresh is the point that the father’s actions are not so exaggerated or
unexpected that such actions cannot lie in the range of common father’s behaviour. In this
105. Bailey, Finding the Lost, 85, 130; idem, Poet and Peasant, 173-80. However, it is unreasonable, in order to
define the meaning of repentance in Luke 15, to merely involve in Ps 23:3 which emphasizes on the active role
of God, not passive one in the recovery, since it is not desirable to draw an accurate picture of repentance only
from it.
106. Kilgallen, The Twenty Parables of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke, 106; Breech, The Silence of Jesus, 195-96;
Rohrbaugh, “A Dysfunctional Family and Its Neighbors (Luke 15:11b-32),” in ed., V.G. Shillington,
Perspectives on the Parables: Images of Jesus in his Contemporary Setting (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1997),
141-164, here 143; Buttrick, Speaking Parables: A Homiletic Guide, 284.
107. Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 581-82.
108. B. Malina and R. Rohrbaugh, Social-Science Commentary, 372; Jeremias, Parables, 130; Bailey, Finding
the Lost, 143-46; Donahue, The Gospel in Parable, 155; Forbes, The God of Old: The Role of the Lukan
Parables in the Purpose of Luke’s Gospel, 138; Hultgren, Parables, 78.
109. LaHurd also argues that such a custom can be transgressed in this situation on the basis of interviewing
contemporary Arab Christian women and anthropologists’ contention that societal norms and written codes do
not tell us all the behaviours in the society. C.S. LaHurd, “Re-viewing Luke 15 with Arab Christian women” in
ed., Amy-Jill Levine with Marianne Blickenstaff, A feminist companion to Luke (London: Sheffield Academic
Press, 2002), 246-68.
82