Page 1 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 1 of 5 | Next |
|
250 x 250 pixels
500 x 500 pixels
1000 x 1000 pixels
2000 x 2000 pixels
Full-size
Full-size archival image
All (PDF)
|
Returning From A Long Trip Luke 15.1-3, U-32 March 9, 1986 This is story is familiar to most of us. The prodigal son takes his inheritance and leaves home. He goes to the city and squanders it all leaving him with nothing but a job in a nearby pig farm. From a moral, an economic, and a religious standpoint. He is totally corrupted. It is precisely what every mother and father knew would happen if their children moved to the city. Certainly this story lends itself to the ideal of rural life over against the seduction of the city. Every possible nuance of interpretation has been foisted upon this story. We have understood the parable as if it had only one point, as Biblical scholars have urged. We have identified with the young forlorn son who makes his way into a far country only to end up in a pig sty. We have understood the elder brother who remained faithful to his father and resented the treatment the younger brother receives from his father. We have looked at the father, and have praised his accepting and understanding attitudes. Whatever our interpretation. There are some fundamental elements to the story that remain constant. It was his decision to do his thing. Though it must be said quickly it was a legitimate decision. The father was obligated to do what he did even though he knew that it was not in the best interests of the young man. He had to let the young man "have his head". With that he gave his young son what would have been his if his father had died at that particular moment. Giving children "their head", creating opportunities for them to freely express themselves, to be exposed to the greatest number of possibilities with the least amount of inhibition that a part of the liberal upbringing that most parents want to give their children. There are advantages to this, as well as certain risks. Certainly this young man had every reason to make it on his own. It is a natural and an important step to take. Dependency is not something that we want to encourage. Whatever we are dependent upon we become attached to, and either love or hate, or both. The lyric of independence is something that sings within the human soul. Independence of mother and father, independence from teacher and mentor are important steps into the maturation process. It is not the objective of the mentor to keep him or her a student. However, independence can take us so far and only so far. To be independent of some things is to importune catastrophe. To be independent of gravity, or to think that one can be is a grave error of judgment. To be independent of the laws that govern the chemistries of our bodies is to court illness and personal disaster.
Object Description
Title of Sermon | Returning from a Long Trip |
Author | Landwehr, Arthur |
Subject | Dependence, Independence |
Date of sermon | 3/9/1986 |
Type | Text |
Format | |
Number of Pages | 5 |
Language | English |
Biblical Book | Luke |
Verses | 15:1-3, 11-32 |
Rights | For permission to reproduce, distribute, or otherwise use this image, please contact The Styberg Library by phone (847)866-3909 or email styberg.library@garrett.edu |
Collection | The Arthur Landwehr Sermon Collection (Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary) |
Identifier | 414 Returning from a Long Trip.pdf |
Description
Title of Sermon | Page 1 |
Biblical Book | Biblical Book |
Collection | The Arthur Landwehr Sermon Collection (Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary) |
Transcript | Returning From A Long Trip Luke 15.1-3, U-32 March 9, 1986 This is story is familiar to most of us. The prodigal son takes his inheritance and leaves home. He goes to the city and squanders it all leaving him with nothing but a job in a nearby pig farm. From a moral, an economic, and a religious standpoint. He is totally corrupted. It is precisely what every mother and father knew would happen if their children moved to the city. Certainly this story lends itself to the ideal of rural life over against the seduction of the city. Every possible nuance of interpretation has been foisted upon this story. We have understood the parable as if it had only one point, as Biblical scholars have urged. We have identified with the young forlorn son who makes his way into a far country only to end up in a pig sty. We have understood the elder brother who remained faithful to his father and resented the treatment the younger brother receives from his father. We have looked at the father, and have praised his accepting and understanding attitudes. Whatever our interpretation. There are some fundamental elements to the story that remain constant. It was his decision to do his thing. Though it must be said quickly it was a legitimate decision. The father was obligated to do what he did even though he knew that it was not in the best interests of the young man. He had to let the young man "have his head". With that he gave his young son what would have been his if his father had died at that particular moment. Giving children "their head", creating opportunities for them to freely express themselves, to be exposed to the greatest number of possibilities with the least amount of inhibition that a part of the liberal upbringing that most parents want to give their children. There are advantages to this, as well as certain risks. Certainly this young man had every reason to make it on his own. It is a natural and an important step to take. Dependency is not something that we want to encourage. Whatever we are dependent upon we become attached to, and either love or hate, or both. The lyric of independence is something that sings within the human soul. Independence of mother and father, independence from teacher and mentor are important steps into the maturation process. It is not the objective of the mentor to keep him or her a student. However, independence can take us so far and only so far. To be independent of some things is to importune catastrophe. To be independent of gravity, or to think that one can be is a grave error of judgment. To be independent of the laws that govern the chemistries of our bodies is to court illness and personal disaster. |