The Parable - Rich man and Lazarus

^{Luke 16:19-31:}
  First, I will endeavour, with God's assistance, to explain this history. "There was a certain rich man;" and, doubtless, on that very account, highly esteemed among men, -- "who was clothed in purple and fine linen;" and, consequently, esteemed the more highly, both as appearing suitably to his fortune, and as an encourager of trade; -- "and fared sumptuously every day." Here was another reason for his being highly esteemed, -- his hospitality and generosity, -- both by those who frequently sat at his table, and the tradesmen that furnished it.
 
2. "And there was a certain beggar;" one in the lowest line of human infamy; "named Lazarus," according to the Greek termination; in Hebrew, Eleazer. From his name we may gather, that he was of no mean family, although this branch of it was, at present, so reduced. It is probable he was well known in the city; and it was no scandal to him to be named. -- "Who was laid at his gate;" although no pleasing spectacle; so that one might wonder he was suffered to lie there; -- "full of sores;" of running ulcers; -- "and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table." So the complicated affliction of poverty, pain, and want of bread, lay upon him at once! But it does not appear that any creature took the least notice of the despicable wretch! Only "the dogs came and licked his sores:" All the comfort which this world afforded him!

3. But see the change! "The beggar died:" Here ended poverty and pain: -- "And was carried by angels;" nobler servants than any that attended the rich man; -- "into Abraham's bosom:" -- So the Jews commonly termed what our blessed Lord styles paradise; the place "where the wicked cease from troubling, and where the weary are at rest;" the receptacle of holy souls, from death to the resurrection. It is, indeed, very generally supposed, that the souls of good men, as soon as they are discharged from the body, go directly to heaven; but this opinion has not the least foundation in the oracles of God: On the contrary, our Lord says to Mary, after the resurrection, "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father" in heaven. But he had been in paradise, according to his promise to the penitent thief: "This day shalt thou be with me in paradise." Hence, it is plain, that paradise is not heaven. It is indeed (if we may be allowed the expression) the antechamber of heaven, where the souls of the righteous remain till, after the general judgment, they are received into glory.

4. But see the scene change again! "The rich man also died." -- What! Must rich men also die? Must they fall "like one of the people?" Is there no help? A rich man in London, some years ago, when the physician told him he must die, gnashed his teeth, and clenched his fist, and cried out vehemently, "God, God, I won't die!' But he died with the very words in his mouth. -- "And was buried;" doubtless, with pomp enough, suitably to his quality; although we do not find that there was then, in all the world, that exquisite instance of human folly, that senseless, cruel mockery of a poor putrifying carcass, what we term lying in state!

5. And in hell he lifted up his eyes." -- O, what a change! How is the mighty fallen! But the word which is here rendered hell does not always mean the place of the damned. It is, literally, the invisible world; and is of very wide extent, including the receptacle of separate spirits, whether good or bad. But here it evidently means, that region of hades where the souls of wicked men reside, as appears from the following words, "Being in torment;" -- "in order," say some, "to atone for the sins committed while in the body, as well as to purify the soul from all its inherent sin." Just so, the eminent heathen poet, near two thousand years ago: --

6. "He seeth Abraham afar off." -- Far, indeed! As far as from hell to paradise! Perhaps, "ten-fold the length of this terrene." But how could this be? I cannot tell: But it is by no means incredible. For who knows "how far an angel kens," or a spirit divested of flesh and blood? -- "And Lazarus in his bosom." It is well known that, in the ancient feasts among the Jews, as well as the Romans, the guests did not sit down at the table, as it is now the custom to do; but lay on couches, each having a pillow at his left side, on which he supported his elbow; and he that sat next him, on the right side, was said to lie in his bosom. It was in this sense that the Apostle John lay in his Master's bosom. Accordingly, the expression of Lazarus lying in Abraham's bosom implies that he was in the highest place of honour and happiness.

7. "And he cried, and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me." -- Thou fool! What can Abraham do? What can any creature, yea, all the creation do, to break the bars of the bottomless pit? Whoever would escape from the place of torment, let him cry to God, the Father of mercy! Nay, but the time is past! Justice now takes place, and rejoices over mercy! -- "And send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame!" How exceeding modest a request is this! He does not say, "That he may take me out of this flame." He does not ask, "That he may bring me a cup of water, or as much as he might hold in the palm of his hand;" but barely, "That he may dip" were it but "the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue." No! It cannot be! No mercy can enter within the shades of hell!

8. "But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented." Perhaps these words may supply us with an answer to an important question: How came this rich man to be in hell? It does not appear that he was a wicked man, in the common sense of the word; that he was a drunkard, a common swearer, a Sabbath-breaker, or that he lived in any known sin. It is probable he was a Pharisee; and as such was, in all the outward parts of religion, blameless. How then did he come into "the place of torment?" If there was no other reason to be assigned, there is a sufficient one implied in those words, ("he that hath ears to hear, let him hear!") "Thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things;" -- the things which thou hadst chosen for thy happiness. Thou hadst set thy affection on things beneath: And thou hadst thy reward: Thou didst receive the portion which thou hadst chosen, and canst have no portion above. "And likewise Lazarus evil things." Not his evil things; for he did not choose them. But they were chosen for him by the wise providence of God: And "now he is comforted, while thou art tormented."

9. "But beside all this, there is a great gulf fixed:" -- A great chasm, a vast vacuity. Can any tell us what this is? What is the nature, what are the bounds, of it? Nay, none of the children of men; none but an inhabitant of the invisible world. -- "So that they who would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence." Undoubtedly a disembodied spirit could pass through any space whatever. But the will of God, determining that none should go across that gulf, is a bound which no creature can pass.

10. Then he said, "I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldst send him to my father's house; for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment." (Luke 16:27, 28) Two entirely different motives have been assigned for this extraordinary request. Some ascribe it wholly to self-love, to a fear of the bitter reproaches which, he might easily suppose, his brethren would pour upon him, if, in consequence of his example, and perhaps advice, they came to the same place of torment. Others have imputed it to a nobler motive. They suppose, as the misery of the wicked will not be complete till the day of judgment, so neither will their wickedness. Consequently, they believe that, till that time, they may retain some sparks of natural affection; and they, not improbably, imagine that this may have occasioned his desire to prevent their sharing his own torment.

11. "Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the Prophets: let them hear them." (Luke 16:29) "And he said, Nay, father Abraham; but if one went to them from the dead, they will repent." Who would not be of the same opinion? Might not any one reasonably suppose that a message solemnly delivered by one that came from the dead must have an irresistible force? Who would not think, "I myself could not possibly withstand such a preacher of repentance?"

 

The Parable of the Shrewd Manager

Luke 16:1-8:
Jesus told his disciples: “There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions. ² So he called him in and asked him, ‘What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer.’
³ “The manager said to himself, ‘What shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I’m not strong enough to dig, and I’m ashamed to beg— ⁴ I know what I’ll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses.’
 ⁵ “So he called in each one of his master’s debtors. He asked the first, ‘How much do you owe my master?’
 ⁶ “‘Nine hundred gallons^[a] of olive oil,’ he replied.
“The manager told him, ‘Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred and fifty.’
 ⁷ “Then he asked the second, ‘And how much do you owe?’
“‘A thousand bushels^[b] of wheat,’ he replied.
“He told him, ‘Take your bill and make it eight hundred.’
 ⁸ “The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light.

If we understand the parable's social setting, we'll see that his actions are not dishonest, just shrewd. By shrewd, I mean calculated to insure one's own self-interest. I think this parable disrupts our usual definition of what acting in our own self-interest means in light of the reversal of fortunes the kingdom of God will bring.
In ancient Palestine, there was a complex social, economic relationship among landowners, stewards, peasants, and merchants. The wealthy landowners sought to get as much profit as possible from their holdings and tenants. The steward was the middleman between the landholder and the merchants and tenants in the exchange of goods and services such as buying and selling grain, oil, and crops and collecting rents. If he was able to get an additional take for himself in these transactions, the master didn't mind; in fact he expected it. As long as the master's profits kept rolling in and the steward did not get too conspicuous in his consumption, the master was fine with the steward's benefiting from each deal. As for the merchants and tenants, they were in a relatively powerless position, unable to directly confront the master. Their target, when they were disgruntled or felt put upon, was the steward, the master's retainer.
The steward's position in this complex social network was both privileged and vulnerable. He had a relatively high standard of living, a benefit of his being able to read and write and his training by the master, but he was completely dependent on the goodwill of the master. He himself states it in verse 3. "What will I do now that my master is taking the position away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg." We might assume that he is whining here, selfishly unwilling to engage in honest labor. He is actually just stating the fact that he is not prepared by physical training or by the habit of hardship to compete with the peasant labor pool for the hardest, most menial of jobs: digging. His strength gone, he would be reduced to begging, and, in short order, would die because of the malnutrition and disease that came with poverty. His situation is dire. Something must be done to prevent this future. No one can do it but him.
While there is desperation in the steward's action, there is also premeditated, self-interested shrewdness. He calls the debtors in one by one, not giving them the chance to compare notes and collaborate against him ahead of time. He knows that his reduction of what they owe will not ensure their permanent goodwill and hospitality toward him. At best it may postpone his poverty for a short time as they invite him to a couple of meals. He may be hoping that the master cannot blame him for not extracting the interest, since to do so would be an admission that his steward, with his blessing, had been condoning charging interest, in violation of the Torah. He may be hoping his actions could make it possible for him to secure another position as a steward for another member of the landowning elite, thereby saving him from a life of hard labor.
While there is desperation in the steward's action, there is also premeditated, self-interested shrewdness. He calls the debtors in one by one, not giving them the chance to compare notes and collaborate against him ahead of time. He knows that his reduction of what they owe will not ensure their permanent goodwill and hospitality toward him. At best it may postpone his poverty for a short time as they invite him to a couple of meals. He may be hoping that the master cannot blame him for not extracting the interest, since to do so would be an admission that his steward, with his blessing, had been condoning charging interest, in violation of the Torah. He may be hoping his actions could make it possible for him to secure another position as a steward for another member of the landowning elite, thereby saving him from a life of hard labor.
 

The Parable Of The Prodigal Son

The parable states the fundamental principal of God's dealings with sinners; and explains something of Christ s own loving concern for them.

We learn from the story, that God loves the sinner; every bit as much before he repents, as afterwards; and that, when the sinner has repented, he or she is fully restored into the family of God.

Let us look at the main points to be made, twice; first, in relation to their place in the developing story; and the second time, in relation to their spiritual significance, in the Christian life, today.

V.11. There is an assertion of self-will. ‘Father, give me…my share’.

In New Testament days, as in our modern culture: it was the customary thing, for there to have been a death, and a bequest, before there could be an inheritance; yet the younger son wanted his share, before it was due.

V.13. ‘Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had’.

Most of the son's inheritance; would have been made up of land, sheep and cattle. Because he could not have taken these things with him, to that 'far country'; the text encourages us to infer that the young man sold the land, sheep and cattle for spendable cash.

If so, this implies that some part of the family estate, has been eroded away, or even completely lost.

The 'far' or 'distant' country must have been a long way off, because not only the Jews; but all of the Semitic people, in the countries around; had nothing to do with pigs.

The text tells us that, in that far-away land, the young man squandered his wealth in wild living. The word 'squandered' is quite explicit. The wealth has been wasted away, with nothing good to show for it. When he was penniless; and a famine set in, and he was in great need; he hired himself out to a citizen of that country - but little good came out of looking after the other man's pigs.

The younger son 'came to his senses’; realized what a great mess he was in, and entered into a debate with himself.

He could see, clearly enough, that he was worse off than the lowest-paid servants in his father's employ; and that there was little or no way that his situation could improve, without going back to his father; asking to be forgiven; and being accepted once more: the alternative to going back home, being to starve to death where he was.

He put his thoughts into action; and went home. He received a far greater welcome, than he would have dared to hope for. His father was watching out for him, and saw him coming, while he was still far away.

The father; dropping any sense of dignity, that might belong to being the head of the family, and estate; and being full of love and concern; ran to meet his son.

He put his arms around him (the text says 'threw' his arms around him; much more emotionally-expressive) and kissed him. In that part of the world, then; and ever since; for a man to kiss another man, on the cheek, is a mark of acceptance.

The returned son had hardly begun to explain himself, and to plead his case, when his father waved all that to one side: it just wasn’t necessary. The father had the best robe fetched, and put on his son. The robe was a mark of place, purpose and leadership within the family and the estate.

He had a ring put on his son's finger. This would have been a signet ring; and, through wearing it, the son could act in proxy for his father, sealing letters and documents with hot wax, marked with the imprint of the ring.

He had sandals put on his son’s feet. Slaves and servants went barefoot, but sons wore sandals.

Wealthy households in that day, always had a special animal being brought along, against the day when a special guest arrived, or a feast was called for.

In having the 'fatted calf' prepared, he regarded, and treated, his returned son as someone so special, that the occasion just could not be allowed to pass without celebration.

The reason for celebrating, was made very plain by the father: ‘This son of mine was dead, and is alive again. He was lost, and is found’.

As we read; the older brother became angry, and refused to share in what was going on. He gave his reasons, which had a certain degree of validity, but which could have been put to one side, as he joined in the celebration.

The father did not argue a case against the older son's attitude. Instead, he stated his love and care for him; and then went on, to make yet another invitation: ‘We just have to celebrate! Won't you join in?’.

Let's look at these points again, from a more spiritual angle.

Verse 11: ‘Father, give me my share’. Through the centuries, especially in Victorian times, Christians largely believed that there could be no 'inheritance' until they had 'died and gone to heaven'.

However, the parable of 'The Prodigal Son' clearly shows that there can be a receiving of part of the inheritance before physical death.

As Jesus taught elsewhere: ‘Whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; and will not be condemned, for he has (already) crossed over, from death to life’.

For the believer, 'heaven’, and the inheritance of it, begins now.

If 'heaven’ begins now; then the Godly qualities that we receive in this life, can be misused, and wasted away; else where lies free will?

The ability to waste away the things of God; without the free will to do so, being snatched away from us; is one of the central points made by Christ in his ‘Parable of the Talents'.

The Prodigal's father loved him enough to let him go; taking a great part of the family's wealth with him.

God, our Father, loves us enough to let us go, even though we may waste the spiritual gifts and graces entrusted to us; and become lost to him.

Verse 14 says: ‘After he had spent everything ...’, he began to be in need and, eventually, his father met those needs. Some Christians see this sort of thing as unfair ...

... on a 'have your cake, and eat it' basis. The young man had what he wanted, of both the 'things of the world', and the 'things of heaven'; and, surely, that can't be right?

To think like this, is to miss the whole point of Christ's teaching about the wideness of God's forgiving love.

Verse 17 says: ‘When he came to his senses, he said...’. The 'King James Version’ puts it even better: ‘When he came to himself'’; when those deep-down things of his true nature, triumphed over the lesser things, then he could return.

When the son returned to his father, he appeared to be driven by a sense of expediency, based on law and justice: ‘If I do this thing, and say that thing, then such-and-such an outcome might be possible’ …

... but his father was not prepared to debate possible arrangements; based on expediency; for he was driven by love and compassion.

God our Father, in the grace of Jesus Christ, is not prepared to discuss issues and arrangements with us; but only to accept us, in love and compassion, and to restore whatever may have become lost to us.

The Prodigal's father was watching out for him; saw him while he was still a long way off, and ran to him. God always watches out for those of his children who have strayed, for whatever reason.

The father threw his arms around his son, and kissed him. The putting of his arms around him was a sign of welcome; and the kiss was not only a sign of acceptance, but also of restored trust.

When any of God's children break trust with their Heavenly Father; and then repent, and are forgiven; God's trust in them is fully restored.

The Prodigal's father put the robe of belonging and leadership around his son's shoulders; the signet ring of responsibility upon his finger, and the sandals of son-ship upon his feet.

So it is, with God our Father. Just as the Prodigal was placed in a position higher than he had before he went away; into sin; so it can be with forgiven and restored sinners ...

... perhaps because the very experience of the severance from God, makes the restored-to-God sinner stronger in understanding and resolve; and, therefore, capable of greater things than before.

The joy of the young man's father, and his desire to celebrate, is in keeping with Christ's teaching: ‘There will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents, than over 99 righteous persons, who do not need to repent’ (Luke 15:7).

The older son took a complaining, judgemental attitude to the whole situation, and refused to join in the celebrations. In Christ's story, the older son represents the Scribes and Pharisees, and their carping, judgemental attitude, to the new things that God was doing through Christ.

By refusing to go into the feast, the older son cut himself off from what was going on. By refusing to accept Christ, the Scribes and Pharisees cut themselves off from God's new way of doing things.

But the younger son - the 'Prodigal' - became not only a 'new man' through responding to those deep things of true self; and turning back to their source, to God; but he also became entrusted with greater things than before.

Is there any way in which our lives, or part of our lives, have been lived in 'a far country'; where we have been rather prodigal in our use of, or waste of, the things of God?

If so, how might we turn back to the Lord once more? If we do know our need to turn back, how strong is our resolve to actually do so?
T
he parable states the fundamental principal of God's dealings with sinners; and explains something of Christ s own loving concern for them.

We learn from the story, that God loves the sinner; every bit as much before he repents, as afterwards; and that, when the sinner has repented, he or she is fully restored into the family of God.

Let us look at the main points to be made, twice; first, in relation to their place in the developing story; and the second time, in relation to their spiritual significance, in the Christian life, today.

V.11. There is an assertion of self-will. ‘Father, give me…my share’.

In New Testament days, as in our modern culture: it was the customary thing, for there to have been a death, and a bequest, before there could be an inheritance; yet the younger son wanted his share, before it was due.

V.13. ‘Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had’.

Most of the son's inheritance; would have been made up of land, sheep and cattle. Because he could not have taken these things with him, to that 'far country'; the text encourages us to infer that the young man sold the land, sheep and cattle for spendable cash.

If so, this implies that some part of the family estate, has been eroded away, or even completely lost.

The 'far' or 'distant' country must have been a long way off, because not only the Jews; but all of the Semitic people, in the countries around; had nothing to do with pigs.

The text tells us that, in that far-away land, the young man squandered his wealth in wild living. The word 'squandered' is quite explicit. The wealth has been wasted away, with nothing good to show for it.
When he was penniless; and a famine set in, and he was in great need; he hired himself out to a citizen of that country - but little good came out of looking after the other man's pigs.

The younger son 'came to his senses’; realized what a great mess he was in, and entered into a debate with himself.

He could see, clearly enough, that he was worse off than the lowest-paid servants in his father's employ; and that there was little or no way that his situation could improve, without going back to his father; asking to be forgiven; and being accepted once more: the alternative to going back home, being to starve to death where he was.

He put his thoughts into action; and went home. He received a far greater welcome, than he would have dared to hope for. His father was watching out for him, and saw him coming, while he was still far away.

The father; dropping any sense of dignity, that might belong to being the head of the family, and estate; and being full of love and concern; ran to meet his son.

He put his arms around him (the text says 'threw' his arms around him; much more emotionally-expressive) and kissed him. In that part of the world, then; and ever since; for a man to kiss another man, on the cheek, is a mark of acceptance.

The returned son had hardly begun to explain himself, and to plead his case, when his father waved all that to one side: it just wasn’t necessary. The father had the best robe fetched, and put on his son. The robe was a mark of place, purpose and leadership within the family and the estate.

He had a ring put on his son's finger. This would have been a signet ring; and, through wearing it, the son could act in proxy for his father, sealing letters and documents with hot wax, marked with the imprint of the ring.

He had sandals put on his son’s feet. Slaves and servants went barefoot, but sons wore sandals.

Wealthy households in that day, always had a special animal being brought along, against the day when a special guest arrived, or a feast was called for.

In having the 'fatted calf' prepared, he regarded, and treated, his returned son as someone so special, that the occasion just could not be allowed to pass without celebration.

The reason for celebrating, was made very plain by the father: ‘This son of mine was dead, and is alive again. He was lost, and is found’.

As we read; the older brother became angry, and refused to share in what was going on. He gave his reasons, which had a certain degree of validity, but which could have been put to one side, as he joined in the celebration.

The father did not argue a case against the older son's attitude. Instead, he stated his love and care for him; and then went on, to make yet another invitation: ‘We just have to celebrate! Won't you join in?’.

Let's look at these points again, from a more spiritual angle.

Verse 11: ‘Father, give me my share’. Through the centuries, especially in Victorian times, Christians largely believed that there could be no 'inheritance' until they had 'died and gone to heaven'.

However, the parable of 'The Prodigal Son' clearly shows that there can be a receiving of part of the inheritance before physical death.

As Jesus taught elsewhere: ‘Whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; and will not be condemned, for he has (already) crossed over, from death to life’.

For the believer, 'heaven’, and the inheritance of it, begins now.

If 'heaven’ begins now; then the Godly qualities that we receive in this life, can be misused, and wasted away; else where lies free will?

The ability to waste away the things of God; without the free will to do so, being snatched away from us; is one of the central points made by Christ in his ‘Parable of the Talents'.

The Prodigal's father loved him enough to let him go; taking a great part of the family's wealth with him.

God, our Father, loves us enough to let us go, even though we may waste the spiritual gifts and graces entrusted to us; and become lost to him.

Verse 14 says: ‘After he had spent everything ...’, he began to be in need and, eventually, his father met those needs. Some Christians see this sort of thing as unfair ...

... on a 'have your cake, and eat it' basis. The young man had what he wanted, of both the 'things of the world', and the 'things of heaven'; and, surely, that can't be right?

To think like this, is to miss the whole point of Christ's teaching about the wideness of God's forgiving love.

Verse 17 says: ‘When he came to his senses, he said...’. The 'King James Version’ puts it even better: ‘When he came to himself'’; when those deep-down things of his true nature, triumphed over the lesser things, then he could return.

When the son returned to his father, he appeared to be driven by a sense of expediency, based on law and justice: ‘If I do this thing, and say that thing, then such-and-such an outcome might be possible’ …

... but his father was not prepared to debate possible arrangements; based on expediency; for he was driven by love and compassion.

God our Father, in the grace of Jesus Christ, is not prepared to discuss issues and arrangements with us; but only to accept us, in love and compassion, and to restore whatever may have become lost to us.

The Prodigal's father was watching out for him; saw him while he was still a long way off, and ran to him. God always watches out for those of his children who have strayed, for whatever reason.

The father threw his arms around his son, and kissed him. The putting of his arms around him was a sign of welcome; and the kiss was not only a sign of acceptance, but also of restored trust.

When any of God's children break trust with their Heavenly Father; and then repent, and are forgiven; God's trust in them is fully restored.

The Prodigal's father put the robe of belonging and leadership around his son's shoulders; the signet ring of responsibility upon his finger, and the sandals of son-ship upon his feet.

So it is, with God our Father. Just as the Prodigal was placed in a position higher than he had before he went away; into sin; so it can be with forgiven and restored sinners ...

... perhaps because the very experience of the severance from God, makes the restored-to-God sinner stronger in understanding and resolve; and, therefore, capable of greater things than before.

The joy of the young man's father, and his desire to celebrate, is in keeping with Christ's teaching: ‘There will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents, than over 99 righteous persons, who do not need to repent’ (Luke 15:7).

The older son took a complaining, judgemental attitude to the whole situation, and refused to join in the celebrations. In Christ's story, the older son represents the Scribes and Pharisees, and their carping, judgemental attitude, to the new things that God was doing through Christ.

By refusing to go into the feast, the older son cut himself off from what was going on. By refusing to accept Christ, the Scribes and Pharisees cut themselves off from God's new way of doing things.

But the younger son - the 'Prodigal' - became not only a 'new man' through responding to those deep things of true self; and turning back to their source, to God; but he also became entrusted with greater things than before.

Is there any way in which our lives, or part of our lives, have been lived in 'a far country'; where we have been rather prodigal in our use of, or waste of, the things of God?

If so, how might we turn back to the Lord once more? If we do know our need to turn back, how strong is our resolve to actually do so?

The Parable of the Lost Coin

Luke 15:8-10:

⁸ “Or suppose a woman has ten silver coins^[a] and loses one. Doesn’t she light a lamp, sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it? ⁹ And when she finds it, she calls her friends and neighbors together and says, ‘Rejoice with me; I have found my lost coin.’ ¹⁰ In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.”

A. When this woman realizes that a coin has been lost, she springs into action to see that it is restored. To her, it is a valuable thing! She lights a light, begins to move things about and to sweep and search the house until the coin is found. She had a will to find it, she worked to find and in the end, she won because she found it!

B. That coin was lost in the darkness (Houses in that day had no windows), it was lost in the dirt (Houses in that day had dirt floors), it was lost in disuse(A lost coin cannot be used), and it was lost in the dwelling (It was lost in the house). What a picture that coin is of men who do not know the Lord!

1. Lost men are in darkness - They may be brilliant intellectually speaking, but spiritually, they are blind, 2 Cor. 4:4. They are all lost in the black darkness of spiritual ignorance! They do not know their condition and they do not know what they need, until they are sought after by the Lord, Eph. 2:1; John 6:44.

2. Lost men are in the dirt - When a coin was stamped, it was stamped with the image of the ruler. When a coin was lost in the dirt, the image of the ruler on that coin would be hidden and marred. So it is with lost men! They were made in the image of God, but that image has been marred and they need to be cleansed so that the image of the Lord might be restored. (Ill. If you don’t think men are dirty, just look at our world!) Man needs someone to reach into the dirt of his life, lift him out and clean him up! (Ill. Men tend toward dirt, just fail to bathe for several days and see what I mean. That is also true spiritually! Men tend toward dirt! They need the intervention of the Lord to cleanse than and make them whole again.)

3. Lost men are in disuse - Just as a lost coin is unusable, so is a lost life. It must be cleansed and restored before the Lord can use it for His glory.

4. Lost men are everywhere, even in the dwelling - I have found lost coins in the car, in the yard and one the street. I have also found them in the house. The same is true with lost men, they may be found everywhere, even in the house of the Lord!

C. When this coin goes missing, this woman sets about the business of finding it. She makes up her mind to do whatever it takes to find her lost coin. And, that’s just what she does! She lights a light, moves the furniture, sweeps the floor and looks everywhere for her lost coin. And, she does not stop until she has found it!

In this, she is a picture of God! He has done everything that is necessary for the salvation of lost people. He loves them, Rom. 5:8; Jer. 31:3; He provided a perfect salvation, Acts 16:31; He gave His Son to pay the redemption price, 1 Pet. 1:18-19; Rev. 1:5; John 3:16; He calls men to come to Him, Matt. 11:28; John 6:44; when they come, He saves them completely and eternally, John 10:28. He has a perfect plan to save lost people!

 

Verse 10 makes the transition to Heaven. We are told that there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repents. Heaven gets excited when a lost one is found! Why? Something of value has been restored to its proper place. God is glorified. A soul misses Hell. That which was unusable is available for the Master’s use. That which was dirty and made ugly by sin is clean and beautiful by the grace of God! It is a glorious day when a lost person is saved by the grace of the Lord God! Nothing honors Him like a soul being saved!