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

giving too much to his children. 148 However, Nolland contends that the parable cannot be
about attitudes to and the use of money or possessions, due to the close link between the
father and God, in which the father’s actions mirror God’s action. Having observed the
degree of God’s role and money’s role in the Lukan parables, he concludes that of the Lukan
parables, only two and three are parables about the use of money or possessions. 149
Thus far from the discussion of approaches and backgrounds for reading the parable,
good possibilities have been suggested. What is important, however, is that none of them are
so comprehensive that they appropriately cover the whole content of the parable, in spite of
the insight they give into understanding the parable. The following can be identified as the
salient points of the parable.
First of all, the purpose of the parable is an invitation to celebrate and rejoice as shown
explicitly in vv. 23-24 and 32. What is also of immense importance in the parable is the
150
emphasis on the father’s joy over the return of his younger son. This purpose, as the pivot
of the preceding two parables, fits the theme well which Luke plans to convey in this bundle
of parables in chapter 15. In view of the analogy, if God rejoices at the return of sinners, how
much more will God’s people jump with joy over the return of a sinner? The people of God
should not only be willing to participate in the celebration, but also be filled with joy over the
return of sinner.
Secondly, in relation to the introduction of vv. 1-2, the parable functions as a defense of
151
Jesus’ association with sinners. Like the instruction of the parable, if Jesus’ receiving
sinners and eating with them reveal God’s mercy and forgiveness, then the Pharisees and the
scribes’ grievances must be stopped. 152
The point, in relation to the story between the elder
son and his father, lies in understanding grace rather than partiality and envy. If the elder son
continuously clings to self-righteousness and the mind of merit and reward, he will never
148. Susan Eastman, “The Foolish Father and the Economics of Grace,” ExpTim 117 (2006), 402-405.
149. John Nolland, “The Role of Money and Possessions in the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32),” in
ed., Craig G. Bartholomew, Joel B. Green, and Anthony C. Thiselton, Reading Luke: Interpretation, Reflection,
Formation (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2005), 178-209, here199-205, 206.
150. Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 50; Linnemann, Parables of Jesus, 80.
151. Hultgren, Parables, 84-85; Jeremias, Parables, 131; Nolland, Luke, 791. But Crossan objects to a defense
of Jesus’ association with sinners, arguing that the parable is about the reversal of the human condition. Crossan,
In Parables, 74.
152. Forbes contends that the parable displays two pictures regarding a stark portrayal of the attitude of the
Pharisees and the scribes. In the relationship of the elder son with his father, “the religious authorities have
misunderstood the nature and character of their God” and in the relationship of the elder son with his brother,
“they have forgotten their relationship to their fellow Israelites.” Forbes, The God of Old: The Role of the Lukan
Parables in the Purpose of Luke’s Gospel, 148-49.
90