Người Cha Nhân Từ – Ngày Lễ Cha

Trong ngụ ngôn ĐCJC kể về câu chuyện 2 con trai, hình ảnh người cha rõ ràng tượng trưng cho ĐCT và 2 người con cho 2 nhóm người lắng nghe ĐCJC. Nhóm 1 là những người thu thuế và có tội. Nhóm 2 là những người Pha-ri-si & thông giáo. Theo lời dạy của ĐCJC cả 2 nhóm đều lạc lối, đều cần trở lại với ĐCT. Có khác chăng là người Pha-ri-si & thông giáo luôn nghĩ rằng họ là những người đã được cứu, đã ở trong nhà Cha nơi thiên đàng.

Người VN chúng ta nói riêng và Á Châu nói chung rất kính sợ Trời, TĐế. Chúng ta dâng của cúng cho Trời và hy vọng Ngài sẽ ban phước và để yên cho chúng ta sinh sống. Trước khi tin Chúa, tôi chưa hề nghe một ai nói về quan hệ với Trời cả.

Không một tôn giáo nào mà quan hệ giữa người tin và Đấng họ tin được so sánh như quan hệ cha con. KTCU có khoảng 15 câu dùng hình ảnh của người cha để nói về ĐCT. Như TT 103:13: Đức Giê-hô-va thương xót kẻ kính sợ Ngài, khác nào cha thương xót con cái mình vậy.

Thật Ngài là Cha chúng tôi, dầu Áp-ra-ham chẳng biết chúng tôi, Y-sơ-ra-ên cũng chẳng nhận chúng tôi; hỡi Đức Giê-hô-va, Ngài là Cha chúng tôi, danh Ngài là Đấng Cứu chuộc chúng tôi từ trước đời đời. (Ê-sai 63:16) Hỡi Đức Giê-hô-va, dầu vậy, bây giờ Ngài là Cha chúng tôi! Chúng tôi là đất sét, Ngài là thợ gốm chúng tôi; chúng tôi thảy là việc của tay Ngài. (Ê-sai 64:8)

Tuy nhiên trong 4 sách PA có trên 165 lần KT dùng hình ảnh hay danh xưng cha để nói lên quan hệ với ĐCT. Sách PA Giăng gồm 879 câu nhưng lại gồm 122 lần ĐCT được gọi là Cha (67 lần trong 3 sách PA đầu) và chỉ có 83 lần gọi là Chúa. Người dùng danh xưng đó nhiều hơn hết là ĐCJC. Mỗi khi nói về ĐCT, ĐCJC đều gọi Ngài là Cha (ngoại trừ tiếng than trên thập giá – ĐCT tôi ơi, ĐCT tôi ơi sao Ngài lìa bỏ tôi!).

Bài cầu nguyện chung bắt đầu với lời: Lạy Cha chúng con ở trên trời. Và trong suốt bài cầu nguyện đó ĐCT được gọi là Cha. Sứ đồ Phao-lô viết trong Rô-ma 8: Thật anh em đã chẳng nhận lấy thần trí của tôi mọi đặng còn ở trong sự sợ hãi; nhưng đã nhận lấy thần trí của sự làm con nuôi, và nhờ đó chúng ta kêu rằng: A-ba! Cha! 16 Chính Đức Thánh Linh làm chứng cho lòng chúng ta rằng chúng ta là con cái Đức Chúa Trời (Rô-ma 8:15-16).

Hay như trong Ga-la-ti: Như vậy, bởi đức tin tất cả anh chị em đều là con Đức Chúa Trời trong Chúa Cứu Thế Giê-su. Vì anh chị em là con nên Đức Chúa Trời sai Thánh Linh của Con Ngài ngự vào lòng chúng ta và kêu lên: A-ba, Cha ơi! 7 Như vậy, nhờ ơn Đức Chúa Trời anh chị em không còn là nô lệ nữa mà là con, nếu đã là con thì cũng là người thừa kế. (Ga-la-ti 3:26; 4:6-7- BM

Tháng 3, 2001 ca sĩ nổi tiếng thế giới là Michael Jackson được mời đến trường đại học Oxford để diễn thuyết (lecture). Trong bài nói chuyện đó có phần sau đây: Tối nay tôi đến với qv không phải như thần tượng của nhạc pop nhưng là biểu tượng của một thế hệ, một thế hệ không còn biết tuổi thơ là gì. Tất cả chúng ta đều là sản phẩm của tuổi thơ. Nhưng tôi là sản phẩm của sự mất tuổi thơ. Nhiều lần trong bài nói chuyện Jackson đã khóc khi nói về tuổi thơ của ông và quan hệ xa cách, hời hợt với cha mình. Cha tôi là một người rất khe khắt và ông đã đẩy các anh em tôi và tôi, từ lúc nhỏ nhất, trở nên những ca sĩ hay nhất. Rất khó cho ông có thể bày tỏ tình cảm. Ông không bao giờ thật sự nói ông yêu thương tôi. Và cũng không bao giờ thật sự khen tôi. Nếu tôi có một buổi trình thật thành công, ông chỉ nói với tôi là show này tốt. Và nếu một buổi trình diễn OK, ông nói với tôi it was a lousy show. Ông chỉ chủ ý trên mọi sự là biến chúng tôi thành một thành công thương mãi… Nhưng tôi thật sự muốn một người cha. Tôi muốn một người cha bày tỏ tình yêu thương tôi. Nhưng cha tôi không hề làm điều đó. Ông không bao giờ nói ông yêu thương tôi khi nhìn vào mắt tôi; không bao giờ chơi đùa với tôi. Không hề cỏng tôi, không hề ném cái gối hay bong bóng nước.

Về sự trách táng của đứa con thứ, người em trai.

Bốn tường nghiêng điên đảo bóng giai nhân

Lui đôi vai, tiến đôi chân

Riết đôi tay, ngả đôi thân

Sàn gỗ trơn chập chờn như biển gió

Không biết nữa màu xanh hay sắc đỏ

Hãy thêm say, còn đó rượu chờ ta

Cổ chưa khô đầu chưa nặng mắt chưa hoa

Tay mềm mại bước còn chưa chuếnh choáng

Chưa cuối xứ Mê ly chưa cùng trời Phóng đãng

Còn chưa say hồn khát vẫn thèm men

Say đi em! Say đi em!

Say cho lơi lả ánh đèn

Cho cung bậc ngả nghiêng, cho điên rồ xác thịt!

Rượu, rượu nữa! và quên, quên hết!

Ta quá say rồi

Sắc ngả màu trôi... (Vũ Hoàng Chương – Say Đi Em)

Hảnh diện của người làm cha

Đại tướng Douglas MacArthur là một vị tướng lỗi lạc của HK. Ông lãnh đạo quân đội đồng minh trong thế chiến thứ II thắng Nhật Bản. Trong cuộc chiến Nam Bắc Hàn, cũng chính ông là tướng lãnh đạo quân đội Liên Hiệp Quốc. Năm 1942 tướng MacArthur được tặng phần thưởng là người cha tốt. (Dĩ nhiên ông đã nhận biết bao nhiêu huân chương trong quân đội và từ các quốc gia đồng minh). Trong lời phát biểu khi nhận phần thưởng, Đại Tướng MacArthur có lời sau đây:

Không có gì khiến tôi cảm động hơn là vinh dự này mà quí vị trong ban tổ chức ngày lễ cha toàn quốc đã dành cho tôi về giải thưởng của người làm cha tốt. Tôi là một chiến sĩ và rất hãnh diện về điều này. Tuy nhiên tôi hãnh diện hơn, muôn ngàn lần hãnh diện hơn được làm một người cha. Người chiến sĩ phải phá hủy để có thể xây dựng. Người cha chỉ xây dựng, không bao giờ phá hủy. Một người đem đến sự chết, một người tượng trưng cho sự sáng tạo và sự sống. Và trong khi đội quân của sự chết hết sức mạnh mẽ thì đội quân của sự sống muôn ngàn lần mạnh mẽ hơn. Điều tôi hy vọng rằng khi tôi qua đời, thì con trai tôi sẽ nhớ về cha nó không phải là một vị tướng từ chiến trận nhưng là một người cha trong gia đình. (Raising Boy, James Dobson, 68-69)

Lòng nhân từ, rộng rãi, tử tế của người cha đối với cả những người làm mướn.

Khi đến hoàn cảnh tuyệt vọng, bế tắc, không còn ai giúp đở, đứa con hoang đàng mới nghĩ đến cha.

17 Vậy nó mới tỉnh ngộ, mà rằng: Tại nhà cha ta, biết bao người làm mướn được bánh ăn dư dật, mà ta đây phải chết đói! 18 Ta sẽ đứng dậy trở về cùng cha, mà rằng: Thưa cha, tôi đã đặng tội với trời và với cha, 19 không đáng gọi là con của cha nữa; xin cha đãi tôi như đứa làm mướn của cha vậy.

Câu được bánh dư dật nói lên lòng nhân từ, rộng rãi, tử tế của người cha đối với những người làm thuê, làm mướn cho ông. Đây là một chi tiết mà anh vẫn còn nhớ về cha mình. Về cách đối xử của cha anh với những người làm việc. Con cái chúng ta sẽ để ý đến cách cư xử của chúng ta đối với những người nghèo khó, cùng túng.

Những người làm mướn được trả lương tùy theo công việc và thời gian làm hằng ngày. Như trong ngụ ngôn ĐCJC kể về những người làm công trong vườn nho trong Ma-thi-ơ 20. Tiền công được định trước 1 đồng đê-na-ri. Người được mướn lúc 9am, người lúc 12pm, người lúc 3pm. Cuối cùng lúc 5pm. Chủ trả người làm 1 tiếng bằng người làm từ sáng sớm hoàn toàn do quyết định của chủ.

Lê-vi-ký 19:13 Đừng ức hiếp, cướp giựt láng giềng. Đừng giữ tiền công của người mình mướn cho đến hôm sau.

Thái độ, cư xử, hành động, lời nói của một người cha với hai loại người ở hai cực đoan nói lên rất nhiều về người cha đó. Với những người ông hoàn toàn có quyền trên họ, và với những người họ có toàn quyền trên ông. Nhân từ, thương xót, rộng lượng, công bình với những người dưới quyền hay tàn nhẫn, bóc lột, nghiệt ngã? Cương trực, thẳng thắng, không nịnh bợ, luồn cuối với những người trên mình, hay luồn cuối, nịnh bợ để được mau chóng thăng quan tiến chức?

Ruth Graham, vợ của nhà truyền giáo nổi tiếng Billy Graham, viết một quyển sách mà tôi luôn để trên bàn viết có tựa đề là Prodigals – and Those Who Love Them (Những người con hoang đàng – và những người yêu thương chúng nó) Trong phần giới thiệu bà viết: Những đứa con đi hoang mới như tin tức ngày mai và xưa như vườn Ê-đen. Những đứa con hoang này thường được nghĩ là những đứa con trai vừa mới lớn. Nhưng chúng nó không giới hạn bởi giống (nam hay nữ), màu da, tuổi tác, chủng tộc. Tất cả đều có một điểm giống nhau: chúng nó đã bỏ nhà ra đi… nhưng vẫn luôn được nhớ đến. (They do have one thing in common: They have left home… and they are missed) (p. 13).

Sau buổi tiệc tối, nhiều người đến cám ơn Mẹ vì đã chia sẻ rất thành thực, cởi mở. Tôi chú ý có một người phụ nữ trông rất thanh lịch, nổi bật, ăn mặc rất sang trọng ngần ngừ đằng sau, chờ có cơ hội để nói chuyện với Mẹ. Và rõ ràng rằng bà có điều gì xúc động lắm vì như không thể cầm được nước mắt. Sau khi đám đông dản dần, người phụ nữ đó rụt rè, do dự mà đến với Mẹ. Bà nói với Mẹ trong nước mắt: “Con trai tôi đã chết vì dùng thuốc quá độ. Bà có nghĩ tôi sẽ gặp lại con tôi trên thiên đàng không?” Dù không biết rõ chi tiết, nhưng Mẹ thấy rõ trước mắt một người mẹ đau khổ. Mẹ trả lời: “Nếu một ngày nào đó bà nghe một tiếng gõ cửa nhỏ nhẹ, rụt rè, và khi mở cửa thì thấy đứa con mình đứng đó, bị thương tích, bầm dập, rĩ máu, dơ bẩn, rách nát, bà sẽ làm gì? Đóng rầm cửa lại không nhìn con? Hay bà sẽ mở cửa rộng hơn và ôm con vào vòng tay của mình?

Dù nước mắt ràn rụa trên má người phụ nữ nhưng tôi cảm thấy dường như gánh nặng đã cất lấy khỏi vai bà. Bởi vì bà biết bà đã nghe từ chính một người mẹ cũng đã hiểu thế nào khi có đứa con đi hoang. Hai người ôm nhau, rồi người phụ nữ xoay đi và mất trong đám đông.

Mẹ biết về những đứa con hoang đàng và quyển sách này nói lên sự tìm kiếm niềm an ủi của Chúa trong khoảng thời gian của cuộc đời Mẹ khi những đứa con hoang đàng bỏ nhà đi xa khỏi tình yêu thương và sự chăm sóc của Mẹ và chỉ có Chúa dõi mắt trông chúng nó. (Foreword by Gigi, p.11-12)

Đó là tấm lòng người mẹ. Còn cha thì thế nào? Có sẵn sàng tha thứ, chào đón khi con ăn năn, quyết định trở về hay không?

Theo phong tục, tập quán xã hội thời đó, dự tính của đứa con hoang đàng hợp lý. Anh phải trả một giá rất đắt, đáng bị mắng nhiếc, đáng phải làm công, làm mướn để bồi thường lại thiệt hại về tài sản đã tiêu sài hoang phí. Anh đã làm mất mặt, làm nhục, làm xấu danh cha và phải trả lại danh dự cho cha, anh, gia đình, hàng xóm, láng giềng.

Phải cần một thời gian để chứng minh qua công việc làm trước khi được cha, anh, gia đình và cả hàng xóm, láng giềng chấp nhận. Những người Pha-ri-si và thông giáo cũng như những người thu thuế và có tội hoàn toàn đồng ý với lời ĐCJC kể về dự tính của người con.

20 Nó bèn đứng dậy mà về cùng cha mình. Khi còn ở đàng xa, cha nó thấy thì động lòng thương xót, chạy ra ôm lấy cổ mà hôn. 21 Con thưa cùng cha rằng: Cha ơi, tôi đã đặng tội với trời và với cha, chẳng còn đáng gọi là con của cha nữa. 22 Nhưng người cha bảo đầy tớ rằng: Hãy mau mau lấy áo tốt nhứt mặc cho nó; đeo nhẫn vào ngón tay, mang giày vào chân. 23 Hãy bắt bò con mập làm thịt đi. Chúng ta hãy ăn mừng, 24 vì con ta đây đã chết mà bây giờ lại sống, đã mất mà bây giờ lại thấy được. Đoạn, họ khởi sự vui mừng.

MS John MacArthur có những nhận xét rất ý nghĩa về câu 20. Trước hết đây là ban ngày khi con trở về. Làng xóm nhộn nhiệp, đông đảo người buôn bán, đi lại. Mọi người đều nhìn thấy người con trai hoang đàng khi anh trở về: quần áo tả tơi, dơ bẩn, hôi hám, chân trần, chân đất không giày dép. Mắt anh không dám nhìn lên hay nhìn quanh vì xấu hổ, nhục nhã, hối hận. Phung phí hết tài sản. Làm mất mặt, xấu hổ cha, anh, gia đình.

Why? Very simple. He wants to reach his son before his son reaches the village. He not only wants to initiate the reconciliation as the shepherd did when he found the sheep and the woman when she found the coin, but he wants not just to initiate the reconciliation – listen - he wants to get to his son before his son gets to the village. Why? He wants to protect him from the shame. He wants to protect him from the scorn, and the abuse, and the slander. He wants to bear the shame, take the abuse. He’s willing to have the people say, “What’s he doing? This man who has been dishonored now dishonors himself by embracing this wretched boy.” But he wants to protect the son from the scorn, the slander, the taunting which was expected, which was just, which was part of the culture, which was expected.

First of all, the father would not be available.  He had been dishonored.  His respect had been tarnished in the community.  He had been shamed by such an outrageous and rebellious son, and he had brought shame upon himself in some ways by even allowing him to do that.  And here comes the son with another outrageous request after he has already cost a great portion of the family its fortune and the father his honor. 

So the Jews would expect this.  They would expect - and this would be what would be done in the Middle East then, and perhaps even today in some places - the father would refuse to meet him.  The father would make him sit outside the gate of the home somewhere in that village for days in public view.  Nobody would take him in so that the whole town could heap scorn on him, so that the whole town could bring the retribution upon his head that he deserved for the way he dishonored his father. 

Scorn and abuse and slander against him and people mocking him, and perhaps even spitting on him.  And the son would expect it.  He would expect it.  He knew it could come and he would sit there and take it.  The Pharisees and scribes would expect that he had to be justifiably shamed before everybody as part of the retribution for the shame he had brought upon his father.

And when the father did let him in after a certain period of time, it would be a very cool reception, and he would be required to bow low and kiss the father’s feet.  Then the father would tell him with a measure of indifference what works he would have to do and for how long he would have to work to demonstrate that his repentance was real.  And if he did work as long as he needed to, and did all the reparations, and all the restitution, and paid back in full what he owed, then he could be reconciled, and only then. 

All the rabbis taught that.  All the rabbis taught that repentance was work a man does to earn God’s favor when he feels sorry for his sin.  That’s what repentance was.  You feel sorry for your sin.  You want to be restored to God, so you do work.  And by that work you gain favor with God by making restitution.  Everybody knew that was the way it was done.  And the village would even after they had heaped scorn on him for long enough would let him work there with a measure of dignity.

But that is not what happened.  In fact, what happened could only be described as shameful, shameful.  What happened “while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion for him, and ran and embraced him and kissed him.”  Now I just got to take that apart a little bit.  “While he was still a long way off - ” hadn’t reached the entrance to the village.  Down some dusty road way out of town, a long way off. “His father sees him - ” which is an indication of the father seeking, isn’t it?  Everybody would know that.  The father looking. 

They would assume he had been looking a lot very often, that he knew the kind of life that his son was headed toward would end up the way it ended, and that he hoped that he would survive it so that he could come back, and the father bearing a private pain and a suffering love all alone in his own heart looking, and looking, and looking, and looking.

How does he do it?  How does he protect the boy?  He sees him, it says, “when he’s still a long way off - ” from the village, it says “ - he felt compassion.”  Not just compassion for his past sin, not just compassion for his present filth - and he was in rags and smelled like a pig - but compassion for what he was about to experience. 

Người cha, trưởng tộc lớn tuổi, gia thế không bao giờ chạy

Now I’ve got to tell you something, folks, Middle Eastern noblemen don’t run.  That’s just basic.  The word running here literally it says, “And running,” is dramn, it is the Greek word that is a technical word for racing in a stadium.  He sprinted is what he did.  It’s almost as if he’s impatient.  He can’t get there fast enough.  This word doesn’t indicate a trot or a shuffle, or a middle-aged scoot.  He sprinted. 

And this is beneath his dignity, folks.  O my, if you only knew.  I’ll tell you.  Kenneth Bailey has made a study of life in the Middle East, having lived there for many, many years, collected material which is rich in its understanding in the Middle East.  He writes this, “One of the main reasons why Middle Easterners of rank do not run is that traditionally they all have worn long robes.  This is true of both men and women.  No one can run in a long robe without taking it up into his or her hands.  When this occurs the legs are exposed, which is considered humiliating.  Clearly - ” he writes “ - exposure of the legs was considered shameful.  The robes themselves reached to the ground to make sure this didn’t happen.  A quaint ruling for the Sabbath states that if a bird crawls under your robes on the Sabbath, you may not catch it.”  Now there’s a problem.  “Because you might have to expose your leg to do that.” 

So it says, “The suggested alternative is to sit very quietly and wait for sundown so no one can see and then seize the bird.  Further, on the Sabbath you could smooth out your robe to make it look nice but you couldn’t lift it up.  If your robe did not reach the ground, and you didn’t have a longer one for the Sabbath, you had to take the hem of it out so that it touched the ground. 

“Also, no one should jump or take long strides.  One foot should be on the ground at all times.  The reason for this last ruling is to assure that no part of the leg is ever exposed.  Rabbi Hisda while walking between thorns and thistles would lift up his garments to keep them from being torn, and he had to offer his followers a defense of this unacceptable exposure of his legs.”

In another tractate, ancient tractate, Abba Hilkiah lifts his robes to avoid thorns while walking in the country.  He is asked to explain these mysterious acts which are bewildering to us.  Outer robes themselves are called mekebeduth, meaning “that which brings me honor.”  Honor was connected to the robe.  Priests making the sacrifices were not allowed to lift their long robes to keep them out of the blood on the pavement, for fear their legs would be exposed.

Listen, this is so much a part of Middle Eastern culture that in Arabic versions of the Bible, the New Testament, there is just an utter unwillingness to have this father run.  In some Syriac versions, translations, the father runs.  But in the Arabic, the older Arabic translations say “he went, he presented himself, he hastened, and he hurried.”  They just can’t put down what the word says which is “run.” 

For a thousand years of Arabic translations of this account, a wide range of such phrases were employed, almost as if there was a conspiracy to avoid the humiliating truth of the text that the father ran.  The explanation for all of this is simple.  The tradition itself identified the father as God and running in public is too humiliating to attribute to a person who symbolizes God.

Finally, in 1860 in what’s called the Van Dyck Arabic Bible, the father runs.  The worksheets, however, of the translators are still available, and the first worksheets indicate they put, “he hurried” only in the last worksheet did they take it, “he ran.”

What is God running for?  Why does He bring shame and scorn on Himself for exposing Himself?  It’s just shocking.  The reason:  The Father runs taking the shame to protect the son from taking the shame.  He takes the scorn, and the mockery, and the slander so that his son doesn’t have to bear it.  And then when he finally gets there, even more shockingly, he embraced him, literally “fell on his neck,” just collapsed in a massive hug, buried his head on the neck of his son, stinking and dirty and ragged as he was. 

And now we know that the father has been suffering silently for the whole time he’s been gone.  He’s been suffering quietly, loving that boy while he was gone, and now that quiet, silent, suffering love has become publicly displayed as he runs through the street bringing shame on himself to embrace his son and spare him from shame. 

Everybody now knows how much that father loves that son.  So much that he takes his shame, that he empties himself of any pride, of any rights, of any honor, and in a self-emptying display of love brings shame on himself in order to throw his arms around that returning sinner and protect him from being shamed by anyone else.  By the time the boy walked into the village, he was a fully reconciled son.

I cannot tell you what shock would go through the listeners.  And if that’s not enough, it says, “And he kissed him,” kataphile repeatedly, repeatedly on the corner of the lips, on the cheek, anywhere.  This is amazing.  You want to know how eager God is to receive a sinner?  He will run through the dirt and bear the shame.  He will embrace the sinner with all His strength and plant kisses all over the sinner’s head. 

Some people think that God is a reluctant Savior.  No, He’s not.  This is the kiss of affection repeated and repeated.  He’s ready to kiss his Father’s feet, but His Father is kissing his head.  This is a gesture in the culture of acceptance, friendship, love, forgiveness, restoration, reconciliation, all the above.  And all of that before the son says one word.  What does he have to say?  He’s there.  That’s enough to indicate his faith in the father and his repentance.  He came knowing he had to cast himself on the father’s mercy, and he came knowing he had to be ready to bear the shame.  And he came.

This is radical stuff, folks, radical, totally unorthodox.  Hence, absolutely unexpected, and this is where the story has its huge surprise.  The father condescends, humbles himself out of this deep love for this son, comes all the way down from his house to the dirt of the village, runs through bearing the scorn and the shame, throws his arms around the penitent believing sinner who is coming to him in his filthy unclean rags.  That father is doing exactly what Jesus did, exactly what He did.  He came down into our village to run the gauntlet, and bear the shame, and the slander, and the mockery, to throw His arms around us, and kiss us, and reconcile with us.

The shock is all this happened without any what?  Works.  That’s the shock.  It was all grace as the next verse makes clear, the son understood it.  “And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven,’ ” or “up to the heaven” “ ‘ - and in Your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ ”  End of speech. 

But he left something out.  What did he leave out?  Go back to verse 19, he left out the last one, “Make me as one of your hired men.”  Why?  Because there’s no need for works.  He’s just received grace.  This is the jolt.  The father is so eager, he receives, and embraces, and reconciles with the son before the son can say anything. 

But when he does speak, he leaves out the works part.  Full repentance, full faith, and no works.  Why?  Because he’s already been received as a son.  He’s already been forgiven.  He’s already received mercy.  He’s already been reconciled.  His repentance is real.  His faith is true.  And his father responds with complete forgiveness and reconciliation.  Now he knows I don’t have to work my way back, he embraced me, he kissed me, he took my shame.

A shameless request, shameless rebellion, a shameful repentance, and a shameful reception by that father in their minds, led to a shameless reconciliation.  Let’s come to verse 22.  This is the last little section about the father.  “The father said to his slaves, ‘Quickly bring out the best robe, put it on him, put a ring on his hand, sandals on his feet.’ ”  We’ll stop there for a minute.

And here again the eyes roll.  The father has no shame.  He did a shameful run, and now he shamelessly heaps blessing on this reconciled son.  They wouldn’t understand this at all, just absolutely mind boggling that a father wouldn’t be more protective of his own honor.  He gives him three things:  A robe, a ring, and sandals. 

They all understood the implications of that.  All of them did.  They would have expected that he would say to him at best, “Look, okay.  I want to forgive you.  Maybe it’s not going to take a lifetime of work, but I want to watch you for a year or two years and see what’s going on in your life, and see if you’ve really repented, and if you really mean that you want a restored relationship.” 

But there’s none of that.  There is this immediacy.  The father says to his slaves - and the picture would be this.  The father comes out of the house, comes running down the dusty street in town, and along behind him are the servants who are running to figure out where he’s going and why he’s running the way he is.  And they know he shouldn’t be doing that, but they’re coming along because they’re his servants from his household. 

And finally he reaches the son.  He embraces his stinking garments, and he kisses him all over the place.  And he turns to the servants, who by then are huffing and puffing along with him.  And he says, “Quickly, - ” tachu, immediately, hastily, speedily with no delay, “ - get that best robe.”

No father would act like that because, you know, every nobleman had a best robe.  I mean, you’ve got one, you know, when you’re going to go to the fancy place, maybe you pull the old tux out, or whatever the super suit is that you wear for special occasions, big occasions.  You ladies all have a special garment that you wear for special occasions.  If you don’t, you go buy one because the occasion calls for it. 

Well, the families in those days had a special robe, and it was the robe that was the most beautiful robe, the most finely crafted.  In fact, it says actually that in the Greek.  I mean, it even calls it a stoln tn prtn, which means the “first ranking garment,” the “first ranking stolen,” stole, robe.  And he puts it on him. 

And then he puts a ring on his hand.  They would all understand that.  That would again be mind boggling because a ring was a signet ring, and it had on the ring the family crest or seal, so that when you stamped your ring into the melted wax on a document it was an authentication of that document, and it had authority.  Wherever you stamped that, then you were bound by that. 

And the hired men went barefoot and servants went barefoot and only masters and sons wore shoes, sandals.  They understand what he’s saying.  This is the full honor of sonship.  He’s giving him honor by putting this robe on him.

By the way, the robe belonged to the father, it was the robe that belonged to the most prominent member of the family to wear in the most prominent setting at the most prominent event.  The father is about to call for the greatest celebration that’s ever occurred in that family and in that village, and he’s giving away the garment that he would normally wear. 

This is a way of saying to the son, “Everything I have is yours.”  This is a token of saying, “The best that I have is yours.  The best of everything I have is yours,” as symbolized in the robe.  It’s even more than that.  You now have become fully restored as a son.  It’s as if the king passes his robe to the prince.  Another self-emptying act by the father, clothing the son in his own glorious garment. 

No father would ever do that.  Again, this father just seems not to be at all concerned about his own honor.  But see, they don’t understand that God’s honor comes in his loving grace and forgiveness.  All they know about is His works and law.  He came in stinking.  He came in rags.  He came unclean.  And nobody was ever going to see him that way again.  That’s the picture. 

He came with nothing.  He didn’t come with a suitcase.  He came in his own stinking clothing.  He had barely been able to arrive.  He had nothing.  That’s how the sinner comes.  That’s how we all came cause God justifies the ungodly, Romans 4:5 says, those with nothing, those who are just wretched and nothing else.

And this is precisely the kind of thing Jesus is doing with these sinners.  This is the kind of thing, this is the very thing the Pharisees and scribes refuse to see as the activity of God.  They refuse to see it as the work of God.  But it is the work of God.  It’s the work of God to give everything He has to the penitent sinner immediately - not after some time gap - but immediately.

And then the father, in doing this, practices what is called historically, it’s an old word, usufruct.  You may have heard it if you ever worked in the financial world.  Usufruct is a term used to speak of the right to exercise control over property that’s been irrevocably given to the older son.  Even though the father has already irrevocably given that part of the estate to the older son, who’s still in the home, the father can apply the right of usufruct to use that at his own discretion since he is still the patriarch of the family.  He has authority to do that. 

And so essentially what he does is lay claim to all that belongs potentially to the older son and say, “It’s all yours.”  And they would be saying, “How could you reward this kid for the way he behaved and tapped the stuff that belongs to the guy who stayed home?”  This again is just beyond their comprehension.  But that’s exactly what the father says. 

That older son would have worn that robe.  That older son probably would have worn that robe first at his wedding, because that’s when that robe would come out.  That was the single greatest event that could happen in a family, the wedding of the older son.  He would have worn it, but now the younger brother has it.  That older son should have been able to act in behalf of his father by having his father’s ring, and therefore being able to sign all the documents authentically that related to the possession of the family.  This doesn’t make any sense.  You don’t reward somebody who does that.  You reward this guy who stayed home, right?  Wrong.

Quickly, without hesitation, not even a blink, put the robe on him, nobody will ever see him in rags again.  And by the way, he doesn’t say to the younger son, “Why don’t you go home and take a bath?  After hugging you I come to the conclusion that this is a great necessity.”  He doesn’t say that. 

He treats him like a prince.  He says, look what he says to his slaves, “You get the robe and put it on him.  You take him.  You clean him.  Treat him like a king.  Treat him like a prince.  You put the ring on his hand.  You put the sandals on his feet.”  It’s like royalty.  And, of course, again this is just beyond imagination.  The message is clear.  Full reconciliation, full rights, privileges, authority, honor, respect, responsibility as a son.

The whole crowd would just be stunned with incredulity.  This is just completely opposite the way they thought.  And then not only are you giving him the robe, which essentially gives him the honor in the family, but you’re giving him the ring, which gives him the authority to act with regard to all that the family possesses, all the assets of the family, all the treasures of the family, all the possessions of the family can be moved around by whoever has the stamp.  Wow.  He has authority to act in behalf of his father.  He has authority to act in the place of his father.  He has authority to dispense all the family resources.

There’s no waiting period here.  There’s no test period.  There’s no reentry time.  There’s no limit on the privileges.  This is full-blown sonship at the highest level.  And it comes swiftly.  All of this should have gone to the older son.  Sandals on his feet, a sign that he’s the master now.  He’s not a hired man.  He’s not even a slave.  He’s the master.  He has authority.  He has honor.  He has responsibility.  He has respect.  He is a fully-vested son who can act in the place of his father, and who has a right to access all the family treasures.  Wow.

What’s the message here?  Grace triumphs over sin at its worst.  The story isn’t saying that every sinner reaches the level he did, but when sinners do, grace still triumphs.  This is a completely new idea.  You have to understand, right?  Completely new idea.  Undeserved forgiveness, undeserved sonship, undeserved salvation, undeserved honor, respect, responsibility, fully vested son without any restitution, without any works.  This kind of lavish love, this kind of grace bestowed upon a penitent, trusting sinner is a bizarre idea in a legalistic mind.

And then the attention focuses from the son to the father.  And there is a shameless rejoicing, verse 23.  The father holds nothing back.  He knows no shame.  He calls for a party to end all parties.  “ ‘Bring the fattened calf, kill it, let’s eat and celebrate; for this son of mine was dead, has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’  And they began to celebrate.”

Every family that had animals, if they were a noble family like this one, obviously, and had some means, would have a special calf in that day would fatten.  The word “fatten,” by the way, in English - the Greek equivalent in the original text is the word for “corn” or “grain.”  This is grain-fed veal.  This is prime veal.  And they kept that calf around for such a thing as the wedding of the older brother, or some very significant dignitary who came, some monumental event which would call for a massive mega feast. 

This was it.  This was it.  This is the biggest event that has ever happened in the history of the family or the village from the perspective of the father.  This is it.  And here we have the picture of heaven, don’t we, rejoicing.  Just one lost sinner comes home and God puts on a mega feast.  Bring that fattened calf, that corn-fed prime veal, kill it.  And all that butchery would go on getting ready for dinner later that evening. 

The animal had been long before selected, fed, cared for, kept for this special occasion.  Meat, by the way, was rarely eaten in the Middle East in Jesus’ day, very rarely eaten.  Only on special occasions did you eat meat at all, and only on very, very special occasions did you eat the fattened calf.  But this was a celebration to end all.  “Let us eat and celebrate.  Let us eat and be merry.”  There was a fool earlier in the gospel of Luke, remember, who said he just wanted to eat, drink and be merry, and his soul was required that night of him.  He was a fool.  He celebrated his own possessions.  If you’re going to celebrate, celebrate the redemptive work of God.  That’s a legitimate celebration.

By the way, a calf like this could feed up to 200 people.  And it should, because everybody in the village would be there.  It would be an insult to the villagers to have a whole calf and not invite everybody.  And it had to be eaten at one sitting.  They didn’t preserve those things.  Everybody come on and join the party.  That’s back to verse 6, when the sheep was brought home on the shoulders of the shepherd, he called his friends and neighbors and said, “Rejoice with me, I found my sheep.”  And in verse 9, when the lady found the coin, she called her friends and neighbors, “Rejoice with me, I found the coin.”  And the father when he found the son, “Rejoice with me, I found my son.”

Verse 24 he says, “The son of mine was dead.”  You remember, I told you, when the son left they would have had what?  A funeral.  It was as if he was dead.  He had wished his father dead, and so they treated him as if he were dead.  The one “that was dead has come to life.”  Who brought him to life?  Who gave him his life back?  Did he earn it back?  No.  His father gave it back with all the rights and privileges.  He was lost, but who made him to be found?  Who embraced him, and kissed him, and made him fully a son?  His father did, and they began to celebrate.

This is not so much the celebration of the son.  This is the celebration of the father.  The feast honors the father.  It honors the father for what he has done.  It is the father who gave him back his life.  It is the father who made him a son.  It is the father who restored him to blessing by merciful forgiveness and gracious love.  And the whole village comes to rejoice with this shameless father who celebrates his own grace and his own mercy. 

This father has exhibited unheard of kindness, unheard of goodness, sacrificial love, sacrificial grace.  The son who was dead, literally the Greek says, “is up and alive.”  The one who was lost is found.  The son has new life, new status, and new attitude.  He has for the first time a real relationship with a loving, forgiving father, who has made him heir of everything he possesses, to whom he has been reconciled, and to whom he will eagerly give his love, his service in response. 

The son entrusts his life to the father and the father entrusts his resources to the son.  The son is finally home.  He’s in the father’s house.  He’s in the family.  He has full access to all the riches of the father.  And he joins with everyone in celebrating the greatness of this event.

I love it, it says at the end of verse 24, “They began to be merry.”  Because this party never ends.  That’s what heaven’s all about.  It’s the endless celebration of the grace of a loving Father to penitent, believing sinners.  That’s what eternity is.  Heaven’s joy will never end when a sinner comes home.

In conclusion, what are the lessons?  I don’t spell them all out to you because I think you can figure them out as we go.  But just a few reminders.  God receives the penitent sinner who comes repenting and believing.  “Him that comes to Me I’ll never cast out.”  There is mercy with Him.  There’s a throne of grace where we can go and obtain mercy.  God gives forgiving grace that is lavish.  God replaces the filthy stinking rags of the sinner with His own robe of righteousness.  As the prophet Isaiah said, “He covers us with a robe of righteousness.” 

God gives the child of His love forgiveness, honor, authority, respect, responsibility, full access to all His treasures, and the full right to represent Him.  We come bringing to the people around us the treasures of God as His ambassadors.  God is almost impatient in His desire to give.  He runs to embrace.  He runs to kiss.  Quickly put the robe, quickly give him the ring, quickly get the shoes.  He wants all that He has to be given to the repentant sinner, and He wants to start the party immediately, and call all who live in heaven to come around and celebrate Him as the reconciling Father who welcomes a penitent son. 

God treats the sinner as if he was royalty, making him an heir and a joint heir with Jesus Christ.  And God holds a heavenly celebration for every wretched sinner who comes to Him and it never, ever ends.

Listen, in conclusion, God rejoices not because the world’s problem of sin have been solved.  Heaven is not up there saying, “Well, we’d like to have a party up here, but so much is going on that’s not good.  We can’t really start the party until things get a lot better than they are now.”  They’re not up there saying, “There’s so much suffering in the world.  There’s so much trauma.  There’s so much pain.  There’s so much disappointment.  It’s such a troubled world.  Wow, we’d like to have a party, but we just can’t get on the upside of this whole problem.”

No, and God doesn’t hold off the party for some big event when 10,000 people get saved in some stadium somewhere.  No.  The party starts when how many sinners repent?  One.  And every time, and the party for every sinner never ends because it’s a party in honor of God, not the sinner.  And the more and more, day in and day out, as the Lord saves people, the party is extended, and extended, and enriched, and enriched, and the angels, and the redeemed saints are praising God for being such a gracious and reconciling Father.

And I guess the question to ask us is what contribution do we make to the party?  First of all, if you’re not a Christian, this is a time to receive the love of the Father who waits for you to return.  But for those of us who are Christians, are we pursuing the joy of God by doing everything we can to take this glorious gospel of forgiveness to the people we meet? 

Some people never understand this.  And they’re religious people who don’t get it.  The Pharisees hated the idea that the Father treated a sinner this way.  And we’re going to see their reaction next time.  Let’s pray together.

Father, if this is such powerful truth embedded in this great story, we thank You for it.  We thank You for how enriching it is to us, and what it tells us is about You.  We love You.  We love You more when we know these things.  We see You in a fresh way.  It’s so incarnational.  It’s so real.  It’s life. 

Thanks for telling us this story not in a fantasy, not in some mystical other world, not with things which we can’t identify, which doubly removes us from understanding, but in simple ways that we can grasp.  Thank You for being the God You are.  We praise You.  We shall praise You forever and ever and ever in Your presence in heaven.  We’ll be there at the party, celebrating such a reconciling God who is in the end honored by being willing to bear shame.  And isn’t that always the way?  None of us will ever be honored by You until we have confronted the shame of our sin.

Father, thanks for a great morning and a wonderful time of worship.  We are overjoyed as we think about the fact that it was the birth of Christ when You first left Your home and came down to the dusty road to the village where we live, this world, and You took the shame, You ran the gauntlet, You soiled Yourself, as it were, with the dust of this world’s suffering in order that You can embrace us, and through Your cross take our shame, and make us Your sons.  It all began for us here at Bethlehem.  No wonder we celebrate.  No wonder we rejoice.  May our joy be true and real as we express our love to You.  We thank You.  Amen.