What does the prodigal son have to do with anything.
Are the ME folks so out of touch with reality that they don't know the difference between a real person (Judas) and people in a story (parable)?
I was wondering the same thing.
And why did Accountable ask me to define the word satan in the Greek?
Then criticize me for leaving out "devil".
What does that have to do with the OP???
Leaving out "devil"?
The word doesn't mean "devil" at all.
People assume satan is the same as the devil (I assume that, too) but the word doesn't mean "devil" at all.
Yeah, diversion tactics.
Better than admitting defeat if you're a proud ME'er.
When a saved person strays, like the shepherd, Christ goes out and searches for him.
When the shepherd finds a wayward sheep, he chastens him by using the rod to break the leg of the wayward sheep.
He then carries that sheep close to him, feeding him, nourishing him, and caring for him.
Keeping him close to his heart until he is fully recovered.
Notice the shepherd does not cast the lamb or sheep away as chastening.
Christ is that Shepherd.
He will not cast us away as a form of chastisement.
He will break our will to stray, but
He will never cast us away.
Three things according to scripture --- Jesus goes looking for him, the Spirit helps him/her find their faith again (1Pet 1), and when they come back (even if that is in death), God welcomes them with open arms, NOT 1000 years puishment.
Do you think that the father killing the fatted calf and throwing a celebration is anything like what you envision for the return of the wayward SON??
SOME good points. Notice the word some.
Anyway.... You definitely believe the parables here deal with Christians, why don't you agree that the other Parables are for Christians too?
I don't mean to make things awkward.... but...... The father did not give all unto the son.
1. The son repented still he was not equal with his elder brother who remained faithful throughout.
2. His repentance brought forth celebration, just like with the lost sheep. Luke 15:7 .......joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth,.....
both are part of the family in backslidden states.
3. NOTICE LUKE 15:31 Thoug the prodigal had come home, the elder son never wandered andthe father said unto him: Son, Thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
If the two sons are now equal, how do you get around verse 31?
No, I did not say the Parable dealt with Christians.
Notice I used the word 'like'.
That parable can be used in the natural as well.
When one loses something that is important to him, he goes and looks for it; not giving up until he has found it.
For instance, my wife lost a sock ( from a favorite pair) a few months back when she was doing laundry.
We searched for that sock for several weeks to no avail.
But we never gave up hope of getting it back.
The other day, I was getting dressed and put on a pair of pants that I had not worn for some time.
Out of the leg dropped her sock!
Boy was she happy.
Parables don't just deal with Christians.
They can deal with the unsaved as well.
They can deal with objects.
I think the key to what the parables are dealing with is found in verses 1 and 2:
1Now the tax collectors and "sinners" were all gathering around to hear him. 2But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, "This man welcomes sinners and eats with them."
So Jesus gives them the parables of the lost sheep, lost coin, and lost son as a rebuke for their holier than thou attitudes. In the parable of the lost son His rebuke is even more plain as the older brother portrays the reactions of the Jewish leadership to Jesus' ministry to "sinners."
Given the context I think the sheep, coin, and lost son all represent unsaved sinners, until they are "found".
Now, exactly what all this has to do with Judas I'm not sure...
So what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander?
I do like your illustration though! Now your wife's socks are "fellowshipping" again!
Though I do believe in dual typology, I do not see it here in the parables. Jesus was very specific as to whom he was speaking to and to what availe. What would the pharasees have understood Him to be saying? I think that is quite obvious.
Someone brought up the word lost. Just studying it out. Sorry if you don't like to see what the word meant in other scriptures.
I believe using one scripture, out of context to prove one's point is a diversion myself.