“The Focus Of The Father”
(Luke 15:1-2)
I. Introduction.
A. It might be more common than we would think; it certainly, to many, seems
natural and wholly correct. What I’m talking about are differing ways to think of God,
the Father and Christ, the Son.
1. There is Christ, our substitute in death, and there is
the Father, more an angry old man who just puts up
with people.
2. In terms of attitude, Christ is a Friend who’s
working to hold back the wrath of the Father. His
role as the One who paid for our sins also means
He’s the only One preventing God, the Father, from
giving people what they deserve, in spite of Christ.
B. You may never have thought of God, the Father, like that. But, how do you
picture the Father in relation to your sins?
What’s His attitude toward us when we have failed so many times? Yes, God
loves us, but does He like us? Or, does He just tolerate us because, after all, His Son
did die for us.
1. The biblical evidence tells us the heavenly Father
wants to have fellowship with every person. That
desire goes back to the time we were lost in sin,
separated from Him (“But, God demonstrates His
own love toward us, as that while we were still
sinners, Christ died for us”, Romans 5:8).
2. Forgiveness was God’s idea; the way to pay the
debt for sin came from Him.
C. People today aren’t the first to struggle with a distorted
view of God’s attitude toward sinners.
-2-
1. The Jews in Jesus’ time on earth had similar
misperceptions. From the premise that God could
not tolerate sin, and the guidelines for righteousness
in the Ten Commandments, the Jews developed a
system to rate where people stood with Jehovah,
based on the degree of their sin.
2. The worse the sin, the less acceptable a person was.
Over time, this developed into a perception of God
“despising” sinners.
3. In addition to this, a person who’s job, or position,
in life, kept them from remaining ceremonially
clean as prescribed in “Leviticus” was considered
unacceptable. Shepherds, tax collectors, butchers
and others fell into this category.
4. Two ways of thinking polarized the Jews of first-
century Palestine.
a. One group (the majority of people) felt as if
God would never accept them because they
could not live righteous and ceremonially
clean lives.
b. The other group thought that their personal
righteousness was enough to make them
acceptable. They looked down upon, and
despised, others as “sinners”.
5. To correct such thinking – both extremes – Jesus
told a series of parables. The last of these is the one
known at the “prodigal son.” The focus of this
story is not the wayward son, nor the angry brother,
but the loving Father – and His attitude toward
sinners.
-3-
a. Always have to put the parables in their
proper context; why Jesus told the story is as
important as the story itself.
b. The context of the series of parables on
“lost” things, in Luke 15, why these stories
are told, can be found in verses 1 and 2 of
that chapter. (RE-READ verses)
c. The religious leaders could not understand
how one who said He was from God could
associate with such unholy, unclean people.
Their thought was: “God has rejected these
people. So why does this prophet spend so
much time with them?”
d. Jesus’ actions did not fit with their concept
of the Father’s attitude toward sinners.
Jesus set out to change that picture.
II. God’s True Character.
A. In this great story we have presented to us God’s attitude
toward sinners, and His reason for sending His son into the
world. It is, by far, the best illustration of the forgiving
nature of God, the Father, in the entire Bible.
B. Jesus’ parable of the “lost” son is especially directed to
those who are a part of God’s family and who are living
under a heavy load of uncertainty, knowing that they have
sinned against, and displeased, the Father.
C. To get the full impact of the story, you have to know
something about the culture of that time and place. Jesus
could not have presented the prodigal son in a more
degrading manner.
-4-
1. First, in his selfish egotism, the son asked for his
portion of the inheritance. The custom was for a
father to give the inheritance at the time he chose.
It would have been unheard of for a son, especially
a younger son, to ask such a thing. Jesus’ hearers
would have understood this to be a sign of great
disrespect, maybe even grounds for complete
disinheritance.
2. Second, the son took the entire inheritance and left.
The right thing to do, the expecting thing to do,
would have been to stay at home and care for aging
parents. Sons were to make sure that their fathers
were buried properly and that mothers were
provided for. This son went away, with no apparent
regard for the family.
3. Third, he spent the entire inheritance in a relatively
short time. A lifetime of work to acquire it, the
wise stewardship to keep it, was wasted on the son’s
brief pleasure.
4. What could Jesus add to make this self-centered,
inconsiderate, irresponsible child any more
disrespectful? Well, after the money ran out and
famine came, he took a job caring for pigs. To the
Jews, that was as low as one could go, as
despicable as one could imagine.
D. Why make the picture so extreme? What was Jesus’ point?
The son’s sinfulness was so great, his waywardness so
extreme, there was nothing to motivate his father to forgive
him. The prodigal’s father forgave the child because it was
his nature to love and forgive – nothing else. The son
could make no case for forgiveness. The son could return
nothing of what had been wasted to the father. He had
dishonored the family, and the family name.
-5-
E. The son realizes the futility of his actions, and his life, and
decides to go home. Apparently, he doesn’t even attempt
to clean up and make himself more presentable to the
father. He just got up, and went home.
1. The father had never given up hope for the son.
He’d waited for the son to come home. He’d
watched for the son, every day.
2. When he saw that dirty, bedraggled figure on the
road, the father ran to him, hugged him, kissed him.
He lavished attention on his “lost” boy, who’d now
come home again. Where he’d been, what he’d
done was of no concern to the father. His only
reaction was: “. . .’this my son was dead and is
alive again; he was lost and is found.’”
(Luke 15:24).
F. The father’s true character – God’s true character – is
revealed in this ending to the story.
1. First, God’s love has no limits. If there was a limit
beyond what the father’s love would not extend,
this son had, no doubt, gone beyond it. But, this
selfish child was forgiven before he even came
home. From the father’s perspective, there was no
condemnation. The son was accepted back
immediately. How far is too far? God has no
limits.
2. How long was the son gone? There is no way to
know, but long enough to spend a great deal of
money, suffer through a famine, and get a job.
What is known is that our heavenly Father is
patient, and His love is patient. The father waited
for his son to return, as God waits for His children
to come home to Him. So, how long is too long?
Only the length of our lives.
-6-
3. Third, the Father (God) is eager to express His
love. (Luke 15:20: “. . .But when he was still
a great way off, his father saw him and had
compassion . . .” No one, with any dignity,
would run in public. This father did. God is so
eager to restore fellowship with sinners. In fact,
God’s eagerness for renewed fellowship may
exceed peoples’ own. He eagerly awaits His
children. He both restores and cleanses (v. 22).
4. Romans 8:32: “He who did not spare His own Son,
but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not
with Him also freely give us all things.”
5. The focus of the father was on the sinner – not the
sin.
a. When he returned, the son had his speech
ready for his father (re-read verse 21). His
focus, like ours, was on his sin, his
unworthiness. He was begging for mercy;
he knew his father had every right to reject
his plea for love and forgiveness. He knew
what he deserved.
b. The father’s focus was entirely
different. His focus was the son, not the sin. He
virtually ignores the son’s speech.
c. But, what about the sin? What about the
waste? What about the embarrassment to
the family?
F. The point is: God has already dealt with our sin. It’s no
longer His focus. We are His focus. The sin is atoned for,
and no longer a barrier between us and God.
-7-
1. When we turn, or turn back, to God, He receives us
with joy.
2. The father in the parable doesn’t ask where the
son’s been. He doesn’t ask what he’s been doing.
He doesn’t ask how he lost all the money. The son
was back. That’s all that mattered, and the past was
forgiven.
H. Two things Jesus says about the return of the son:
1. The father had “compassion” for his son (verse 20).
2. The father says “. . .let us eat and be merry”
(verse 23). The father had joy for his son’s return.
III. Conclusion.
A. We have a forgiving Father whose love and patience are
unlimited. We cannot push Him too far. He desires to
have fellowship with us. His greatest concern is us, not our
sin.
B. Remember the five facts about the true nature of God:
1. The heavenly Father’s love has no limits.
2. The heavenly Father’s love is patient.
3. The heavenly Father is eager to express His love.
4. The heavenly Father’s focus is on the sinner.
5. God receives sinners into fellowship with Him
joyfully.