22<\/strong>. But the father said to his servants<\/em> ] It is as though he had purposely cut short the humble self-reproaching words of shame which would have entreated him to make his lost son like one of his hired servants. “While they are yet speaking, I will hear,” Isa 65:24<\/span>.<\/p>\n Bring forth<\/em> ] The true reading is probably ‘Bring forth quickly<\/em> ’ , B, L, &c.<\/p>\n the best robe<\/em> ] The talar<\/em> or stole poderes,<\/em> Luk 20:46<\/span>; Joh 19:23<\/span>; Isa 61:10<\/span>; Rev 3:18<\/span>. Compare the remarkable scene of taking away the filthy rags from the High Priest Joshua, and clothing him with change of raiment, in Zec 3:1-10<\/span>. It is literally ‘the first<\/em> robe’ and some have explained it of the robe he used<\/em> to wear at home the former robe.<\/p>\n shoes on his feet<\/em> ] Another sign that he is to be regarded as a son, and not as a mere sandalled or unsandalled slave (see on Luk 10:4<\/span>). Some have given special and separate significance to the best robe, as corresponding to the ‘wedding garment,’ the robe of Christ’s righteousness (Php 3:9<\/span>); and have identified the seal-ring with Baptism (Eph 1:13-14<\/span>); and the shoes with the preparation of the Gospel of peace (Eph 6:15<\/span>; Zec 10:12<\/span>); and in the next verse have seen in the ‘fatted calf’ an allusion to the Sacrifice of Christ, or the Eucharist. Such applications are pious and instructive afterthoughts, though the latter is as old as Irenaeus; but it is doubtful whether the elaboration of them does not weaken the impressive grandeur and unity of the parable, as revealing the love of God even to His erring children. We must not confuse Parable<\/em> with Allegory.<\/em> The one dominant meaning of the parable is that God loved us even while we were dead in sins, Eph 2:1<\/span>; Eph 2:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n kill it<\/em> ] Rather, sacrifice it (comp. Herod. i. 118 where there is a sacrifice and supper for a son’s safety). Hence perhaps one reason for assigning to St Luke the Cherubic symbol of the calf (Introd. p. 13).<\/p>\n The best robe – <\/B>The son was probably in rags. The joy of the father is expressed by clothing him in the best raiment, that he might appear well. The robe here mentioned is probably the outer garment; and the father told them to put on him the best one that was in the house – one reserved for festival occasions. See Gen 27:15<\/span>.<\/P> A ring on his hand – <\/B>To wear a ring on the hand was one mark of wealth and dignity. The rich and those in office commonly wore them. Compare Jam 2:2<\/span>. To give a ring was a mark of favor, or of affection, or of conferring office. Compare Gen 41:42<\/span>; Est 8:2<\/span>. Here it was expressive of the favor and affection of the father.<\/P> Shoes on his feet – <\/B>Servants, probably, did not usually wear shoes. The son returned, doubtless, without shoes a condition very unlike that in which he was when he left home. When, therefore, the father commanded them to put shoes on him, it expressed his wish that he should not be treated as a servant, but as a son. The word shoes here, however, means no more than sandals, such as were commonly worn. And the meaning of all these images is the same – that God will treat those who return to him with kindness and affection. These images should not be attempted to be spiritualized. They are beautifully thrown in to fill up the narrative, and to express with more force the general truth that God will treat returning penitents with mercy and with love. To dress up the son in this manner was a proof of the fathers affection. So God will bestow on sinners the marks of his confidence and regard.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 22<\/span>. Bring forth the best robe<\/B><\/I>] Bring out that chief<\/I> garment<\/I>, , the garment which was laid by, to be used only on birth-days<\/I> or festival<\/I> times. Such as that which Rebecca had laid by for Esau, and which she put on Jacob when she made him personate his brother. See Clarke on Ge 27:15<\/span>.<\/P> <\/P> Put a ring on his hand<\/B><\/I>] Giving a ring was in ancient times a mark of honour<\/I> and dignity<\/I>. See Ge 41:42<\/span>; 1Kg 21:8<\/span>; Es 8:2<\/span>; Da 6:17<\/span>; Jas 2:2<\/span>.<\/P> <\/P> Shoes on his feet<\/B><\/I>] Formerly those who were captivated had their shoes taken off, Isa 20:1<\/span>; and when they were restored to liberty their shoes were restored. See 2Ch 28:15<\/span>. In Bengal, shoes<\/I> of a superior quality make one of the distinguishing parts of a person’s dress. Some of them cost as much as a hundred rupees<\/I> a pair; 10 or 12. Reference is perhaps made here to some such costly shoes. It is the same among the Chinese<\/I>: some very costly shoes<\/I> and boots<\/I> of that people are now before me.<\/P><\/p>\n We must remember that we are in a parable where a sinner is represented to us under the notion of a prodigal son; God, under the notion of an indulgent father; a repenting sinner, under the notion of a prodigal returning to his father, confessing his error, petitioning his father for mercy, acknowledging he deserveth none, but casting himself upon his fathers goodness and mercy. It is observed by an eminent author, that amongst all the parables this is one of the most famous, and wherein is the most full and perfect representation of the thing intended to be represented, and an applicableness of every part of the similitude to that which it is brought to represent. This part of it represents the grace of God to truly repenting sinners. We before heard his readiness and willingness to receive them, this part lets us see the manner how he will treat them. As in case of apostasy, the seeming righteousness and profession of men shall not be remembered, Eze 3:20<\/span>; 33:13<\/span>; so in case of a true and hearty repentance, the sins of a soul shall not be remembered, Isa 43:25<\/span>. <\/P> The father taketh no notice of the prodigals leaving his house, or wasting his estate riotously, but saith, <\/P> Bring forth the best robe, <\/B> <\/span>; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: and bring hither the fatted calf<\/B>, <\/span>. I find some interpreters who by the fatted calf<\/I> are willing enough to understand Christ; yet interpreting the best robe, <\/I>innocency, or inherent righteousness. Nor is it an ill interpretation, if we consider, that God, at the same time when he imputeth the merits of Christ to the soul for justification, doth also put his Spirit of holiness into the soul, by which being renewed in the inward man, this man brings forth the fruits of holiness unto righteousness, Eze 36:26<\/span>,27<\/span>. But why we should not understand both the phrases of the application of Christs merits, and the imputation of his righteousness to the soul, I cannot tell, considering, that the church of Laodicea is counselled to buy of him white raiment, <\/I>that she might be clothed, <\/I>Rev 3:18<\/I><\/span>; and that those clothed with white robes, <\/I>Rev 7:14<\/I><\/span>, are said to have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb; <\/I>and that though the habits of grace are sometimes in holy writ compared to clothing, Be ye clothed with humility, <\/I>( saith the apostle), yet these are not <\/span>. I should therefore rather choose to interpret the killing of the fatted calf for the prodigal son, as representing that application of the blood of Christ, which is made to every sinner that truly repenteth, and maketh its application to God for mercy; and the best robe, as the righteousness of Christ, in that moment reckoned unto the soul (thus believing) for righteousness. Further yet, (to consider it only in the parable), the word <\/span>, sacrifice the fatted calf, seems to signify what a great cause of thanksgiving to God, as well as joy amongst men, the conversion of a sinner is. We that are earthly parents, or ministers of the gospel, should not receive the news, or see the visible probability of a souls being converted, and returning unto God, without offering a sacrifice of thanksgiving unto God for doing such things for men, and without a true and hearty rejoicing in ourselves. But to return again to the meaning of the parable. <\/P> Let us eat, and be merry:<\/B> consider these words as the words of a heavenly Father, they signify unto us, that the eternal God, from the day that a repenting soul hath the blood of Christ applied to it, and is clothed with his righteousness, is at peace with the soul, hath a communion with it, and that it from that time hath a true right to spiritual mirth and rejoicing; for light is sown for the righteous, and joy for the upright in heart:<\/I> though possibly the soul at present, through temptations, cannot apprehend it, and be not actually possessed of that joy and peace which followeth believing, yet it hath a right to it, and indeed none but that soul hath any thing to do with peace. <\/P> It followeth, For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.<\/B> A sinful soul is a dead soul, as the woman that liveth in pleasure<\/I> is said to be dead while she liveth, <\/I>by the apostle. The conversion of a sinner is as a resurrection from the dead. Nor is any soul capable of any true mirth, till it be reconciled to God through the blood of Christ. <\/P> <\/p>\n 22. But the Father said,<\/B> c.Theson has not said all he purposed, not so much, because the father’sdemonstrations had rekindled the filial, and swallowed up all servilefeeling [TRENCH] (on theword “Father,” see on Lu15:18<\/span>), but because the father’s heart is made to appear too fullto listen, at that moment, to more in this strain. <\/P> the best robe<\/B>CompareZec 3:4<\/span> Zec 3:5<\/span>,”Take away the filthy garments from him; behold I have clothedthee with change of raiment; and they clothed him with garments”(Isa 61:10<\/span>; Rev 3:18<\/span>).<\/P> a ring<\/B>(Compare Gen 41:42<\/span>;Jas 2:2<\/span>). <\/P> shoes<\/B>Slaves wentbarefoot. Thus, we have here a threefold symbol of freedom<\/I> andhonor,<\/I> restored, as the fruit of perfect reconciliation.<\/I><\/P><\/p>\n But the father said to his servants<\/strong>,…. The word “but”, with which those words begin, is expressive of much grace, as it often is; see 1Co 6:11<\/span> and signifies, that though the son had behaved so badly, and was now so sensible of it himself, as that he desired to be a hired servant, being unworthy to be called a son; but the “father”, against whom he had sinned, would hear nothing of it: but<\/p>\n said to his servants<\/strong>; not the angels, but the ministers of the Gospel; who are the servants of the most high God; and whose business it is to set forth, in the ministry of the word, the righteousness of Christ, and the everlasting love of God; and to direct souls to a life and conversation becoming the Gospel of Christ; and to set before them the rich provisions of the Gospel for their nourishment, joy, and comfort. These servants, the father of the son ordered, not to take him away from his presence, as one whose person he could not endure in his sight; nor to terrify and affright him with the curse and condemnation of the law, and fill his mind with wroth and terror; nor even to chastise and correct him for his former course of living, and to upbraid him with it; but to confer upon him all the honour, and high favours, and blessings that could be expressed in the following language:<\/p>\n bring forth the best robe<\/strong>; out of the wardrobe, that it is in. The Vulgate Latin version adds “quickly”; which increases the father’s regard to him and shows that he was in haste to have his son appear in a better condition: the Arabic version adds it in the next clause, “and put it on him quickly”; which expresses the same thing: and the Ethiopic version renders it, “hasten ye, bring”, c. By the “best robe” is meant, not water baptism nor an holy life and conversation; nor any particular grace, as faith, or hope, or charity; or the whole of sanctification; nor Adam’s robe of innocence; but the righteousness of Christ which is often compared to a robe, or garment, Isa 61:10<\/span> because it is not any thing in believers, but what is unto them, and upon them, and is put there by an act of God’s grace in imputation; and is what covers their naked souls, and hides their sins from the avenging eye of divine justice; protects them from all injuries, and saves them from wrath to come; as well as beautifies and adorns them, and renders them acceptable in the sight of God; and keeps them warm and alive; and gives them a right and title to eternal life. This is as in the Greek text “the first robe”; and so it is rendered by the Vulgate Latin, and Arabic versions; because it was first in God’s designation and counsel, and in Christ the head of his people, in whom they are blessed with all spiritual blessings before the foundation of the world, and so with this blessing; and it was also provided and secured in the everlasting covenant of grace, long before Adam’s robe of innocence and righteousness was made and wore by him: the reference is not to the first that should be come at in the wardrobe; or to that which the son wore before he went into the far country; but to the , “Talith”, which was the first and uppermost garment wore by the Jews, and answers to the Greek word<\/p>\n , “the stole”, here used: so the Babylonish garment is called, , d which the gloss interprets a “Talith”, made of pure wool. The Ethiopic version renders the phrase, “fragrant garments”; and such are Christ’s garments of salvation, and robe of righteousness; see Ps 45:8<\/span> the Persic version renders it, “the splendid robe”; and the Syriac, as ours, the “chief”, or “best robe”; and such is Christ’s righteousness: it is a better righteousness, not only than that of a self-righteous Pharisee; but better than the outward conversation garment of a real good man, which, at best, is imperfect; or than the inward sanctification of the Spirit of God, which, though pure, is not yet perfect: it is better than the robe of innocence wore by Adam in his sinless state; for that was but a natural righteousness, and the righteousness of a creature, and was loseable, as the event has shown; and had he kept it, would not have given him a title to eternal life: yea, it is better than the righteousness of the angels heaven; for what is said of Adam’s, may be said of theirs, that it is natural, the righteousness of a creature; and had it not been for confirming grace, a loseable one: but Christ’s righteousness is pure and perfect; the righteousness of God, and an everlasting one: and when the servants of God, the ministers of the Gospel, are ordered to bring it out,<\/p>\n and put it on him<\/strong>: this is done, not by the imputation of it to men, for that is the Father’s act; nor by application of it to them, that is the Spirit’s work; but by a declaration of it, setting it forth in a ministerial way before them; declaring it to be a justifying one, and encouraging their faith to lay hold upon it as such:<\/p>\n and put a ring on his hand<\/strong>; on one of the fingers of his hand: by which is intended not the grace of faith; that is, rather the hand on which the ring is put; and though this grace is both precious and ornamental, as will be allowed, yet it does not unite to Christ, this must be denied; it being a grace which flows from union, as all grace does; and by which souls have communion with Christ: nor are good works designed; such indeed who are called by grace, are to be set to work from a right principle, to a right end; and true grace does show itself by works; and good works are the seal and token of grace to the world; but then, as before, these are rather meant by the hand; since that is the instrument of action: nor is the seal and earnest of the Spirit meant by the ring. The Spirit of God is certainly the seal of grace, and the earnest of glory; and to have this is a high favour, and a precious benefit indeed, and what will never be taken away; but as faith, so not the Spirit is the bond of union between God and his people, but the fruit of it: by the “ring” is meant the everlasting love of God; and which, as a ring, is round, and has neither beginning nor end; it does not begin with the obedience of his people, nor with their love to him; nor with their conversion; nor with the mission, sufferings, and death of Christ; but was from all eternity; nor will it have any end, nor can there be any separation from it: this is the bond of union, that can never be dissolved; and this being manifested to the soul, is a token of freedom; it sets a man free from the bondage of corruption, and from the slavery of Satan, and introduces into the liberty of the children of God: it is a mark of great honour, a sign of riches, both of grace and glory; it is a declaration of sonship, and heirship; and is a seal and pledge of everlasting happiness: now the putting on of this ring does not design the shedding abroad of this love in the heart by the Spirit of God; but the declaration of it by his servants in a ministerial way; setting it forth in its nature and effects, to the great joy and comfort of souls; when believers receive it by the hand of faith, and which constrains them, and makes them active, and puts them upon doing good works to the glory of God.<\/p>\n And shoes on his feet<\/strong>: by feet are meant the outward walk and conversation; which in persons called by grace should be different from what it was before, and from that of others: it should not be loose and naked, as those that walk barefoot, but should be upright, straight, and regular; not carnal and earthly, but spiritual and heavenly; and should be with prudence, care, and circumspection, and worthy of their calling, and as becomes the Gospel of Christ: and by “the shoes” may be meant, the preparation of the Gospel of peace, Eph 6:15<\/span>. The Gospel is as shoes to the feet; it beautifies and adorns, So 7:1<\/span> it keeps the feet tight and straight, the conversation regular and upright; preserves from slipping and failing; strengthens and makes more fit for walking; directs, guides, and influences in walking, and protects from the stones, thorns, and scorpions of the world’s reproaches; and the doctrines of it are shoes that will never wear out: and to walk according to the Gospel of Christ, is what Gospel ministers direct and exhort unto, and may be meant by their putting on those shoes; they pressing a good life and conversation from, and by the doctrines of grace. A person with all these things on him was reckoned, among the Jews, as one thoroughly dressed: a canon of theirs, relating to the defilement of leprosy, runs thus e;<\/p>\n “a man of Israel that goes into a house infected with the plague of leprosy, <\/p>\n , “clothed with garments, and his sandals on his feet, and his rings on his hands”, lo, that man is immediately defiled.”<\/p>\n d T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 44. 1. Vid. Targum in Jos. vii. 21. e Maimon Hilch. Tumaot Tzaraath, c. 16. sect. 6. T. Bab. Cholin, fol 71. 2.<\/p>\n The best robe <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). <\/SPAN><\/span> is an old word for a fine stately garment that comes down to the feet (from <\/SPAN><\/span>, to prepare, equip), the kind worn by kings (Mark 16:5<\/span>; Luke 22:46<\/span>). Literally, “a robe the first.” But not the first that you find, but the first in rank and value, the finest in the house. This in contrast with his shabby clothes.<\/P> A ring <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). Common in classical writers and the LXX, but here only in the N.T. From <\/SPAN><\/span>, finger. See <\/SPAN><\/span> in Jas 2:2<\/span>.<\/P> Shoes <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). Sandals, “bound under.” Both sandals and ring are marks of the freeman as slaves were barefooted. <\/P> <\/p>\n To his servants. Bond – servants. There is a fine touch in throwing in the bond – servants immediately after thy son (ver. 21). <\/P> Bring forth. Some texts add quickly [] <\/SPAN><\/span>. So Rev. <\/P> The best robe [ ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Lit., a robe, the first. Properly of a long, flowing robe, a festive garment. See Mr 16:5<\/span>; Luk 20:46<\/span>. Ring. See on Jas 2:2<\/span>. Compare Gen 41:42<\/span>. <\/P> Shoes. Both the ring and the shoes are marks of a free man. Slaves went barefoot.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “But the father said to his servants,” <\/strong>(ei pen de ho pater pros tous doulous autou) “Then the father said directly to his slave-servants,” directing them, indicating acceptance and forgiveness of the prodigal’s sins, 1Jn 1:8-9<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “Bring forth the best robe,” <\/strong>(tachoe eksenegkate stolen ten ptoten) “You all bring out quickly the first order robe,” for the son who returned in rags, the robe of first priority order, for special occasion. One also that is a son-robe, not a servant-robe, so happy was the father, Isa 61:10<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “And put it on him:” <\/strong>(kai endusate auton) “And you all clothe him,” or dress him properly, as a returned, reconciled son, one now righteous, Zec 3:3-5<\/span>; Rev 3:18<\/span>; Rev 12:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “And put a ring on his hand,” <\/strong>(kai dote daktulion eis ten cheira autou) “And give (for him) a ring on his hand,” on a finger of his hand, a symbol, sign, or emblem of a free man, for slaves wore no rings, Gen 41:42<\/span>. It was a symbol of love eternal.<\/p>\n 5) “And shoes on his feet:” <\/strong>(kai hupodemata eis tous podas) “And (give) sandals to put on his feet,” to separate him from the slaves, for slaves wore no rings, went barefooted, or in the poorest of sandals. He was now shod for comfort in service and fellowship; These <\/strong>were tokens of reconciliation.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 22. Bring out the best robe. Although in parables (as we have frequently observed) it would be idle to follow out every minute circumstance, yet it will be no violence to the literal meaning, if we say, that our heavenly Father not only pardons our sins in such a manner as to bury the remembrance of them, but even restores those gifts of which we had been deprived; as, on the other hand, by taking them from us, he chastises our ingratitude in order to make us feel ashamed at the reproach and disgrace of our nakedness. <\/p>\n (22) Bring forth the best robe.<\/strong>It is hardly necessary, perhaps, in such a parable, to press the symbolic interpretation of each minute detail; but in this instance the symbolism lies so near the surface that it is at least well to ask ourselves what meaning either earlier or later associations would lead the disciples to attach to them. The best robe cannot well be other than the garment of praise (Isa. 61:3<\/span>), the vesture of righteousness, the new life and immortality with which it is the desire of the penitent to be clothed upon; the ring, as the signet upon the right hand (Jer. 22:24<\/span>), must be the token of the special favour of the Giver, the seal of his calling and election; the shoes must answer to that preparation or readiness which comes from the gospel of peace (Eph. 6:15<\/span>), and which makes him eager to do his work as a messenger who proclaims that gospel to others, and which he need not lay aside (comp. Exo. 3:5<\/span>) even when he treads on the holy ground where man holds communion with God, the forgiven and restored son with the Eternal Father.<\/p>\n 22<\/strong>. <\/strong> The best robe<\/em> Literally, the first robe; <\/em> that is, the first in quality <\/em> of the whole. <\/p>\n Robe ring shoes<\/em> These investments betoken the bestowing of the endowments and prerogatives of the child of God.<\/p>\n “But the father said to his servants, ‘Bring forth quickly the best robe, and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet, and bring the fatted calf, and kill it, and let us eat, and make merry, for this my son was dead, and is alive again, he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to be merry.”<\/p>\n But the father had forgiven his son, and he called to the servants to reinstate him in his former position. He was to be clothed with the very best robe available, a sign of status; a ring was to be put on his finger, a sign of his reinstatement to a position of authority in the household; and shoes were to be put on his poor bare feet. Shoes were worn only by free men, and in the house only by the owners. This was thus a repudiation of the suggestion that he be a servant and an acknowledgement that he was once more to be seen as one of the ‘masters’. And then the partying was to begin.<\/p>\n We are reminded by this picture of another who stood before God in filthy garments, one who as the High Priest was bearing in himself the sin of Israel, and how God in His grace had received him and reclothed him in glorious apparel (Zec 3:1-5<\/span>) ready for his future service. And so does He offer the robe of Christ’s righteousness to all who repent and believe.<\/p>\n And once the son was clothed and freshened up the fatted calf was to be killed. This was the calf which in well-to-do households was kept aside and especially fattened up, and was then reserved for when important guests came. And in the killing and shedding of the blood of the calf every Jew would see an offering of gratitude and thanksgiving to God, and of atonement, for its blood would be poured out on the ground as an offering to God (Deu 12:24<\/span>). And then all were to eat and make merry because it was as though his son ‘had been dead and had come alive again, he had been lost, and now he was found’.<\/p>\n The powerful wording brings out that the father had never expected to see his son again. Probably we are to see that when no word had come back the father had sent men to look for his son, but had discovered that he had covered his tracks too well. He had not wanted to be found. And the father had then reluctantly given him up for dead. He had become a ‘missing person’.<\/p>\n But now all was changed. He was back. It was as though he had risen from the dead. He was alive (compare Rom 7:9<\/span> for the use of the verb). He was no longer a ‘missing person’. He was here in front of their eyes! Like the sheep he was alive and home, like the coin he was found and restored as a treasured possession.<\/p>\n There were no doubt a number in the crowds around Jesus who were also missing persons, young men who had abandoned their homes. Perhaps now they would be made to think again. And there were others who would recognise that they had deserted God’s ways, and could now recognise that He was ready to welcome them back on their turning from sin and coming to Him.<\/p>\n Luk 15:22<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Bring forth the best robe,<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> It is observed by Ferrarius, that the , or long robe, <\/em>was a garment which servants never wore; so that his father’s ordering any such garment, and especially the best, to be brought, was declaring in the most moving manner that can be imagined, how far hewas from intending to treat him like a servant. His mentioning the shoes <\/em>and the ring <\/em>(which were worn not only as signs of freedom, but of dignity and honour) speaks the same language. See Gen 41:42<\/span>. <\/span>Jam 2:2<\/span>. <\/p>\n 22 But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it<\/em> on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his<\/em> feet: <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 22. The best robe<\/strong> ] That white raiment of Christ’s righteousness,Rev 3:18<\/span>Rev 3:18<\/span> ; that rich and royal array, Psa 45:14<\/span> , the righteousness ( ) of the saints, Rev 19:8<\/span> . <\/p>\n 22.<\/strong> ] All these gifts belong to his reception, not as a servant, but as a son: the first<\/em> (best) robe<\/em> , for him who came in rags, Isa 61:10<\/span> ; Rev 3:18<\/span> : not the robe which he used to wear<\/em> his former robe<\/em> this would not be consistent with the former part of the parable, in which he was not turned out with any disgrace, but left as a son<\/em> and of his own accord:<\/em> but a robe,<\/strong> ( yea<\/strong> ) the first and goodliest. The ring,<\/strong> a token of a distinguished and free person, see Jas 2:2<\/span> ; Gen 41:42<\/span> .<\/p>\n The shoes,<\/strong> also the mark of a free man (for slaves went barefoot), see Zec 10:12<\/span> ; Eph 6:15<\/span> . These are the gifts of grace and holiness with which the returned penitent is clothed by his gracious Father, see Zec 3:4-5<\/span> .<\/p>\n Luk 15:22<\/span> . : their presence conceivable, the father’s running and the meeting noticed and reported by some one, so soon drawing a crowd to the spot, or to meet the two on the way to the house. To them the father gives directions which are his response to the son’s proposed self-degradation. He shall not be their fellow, they shall serve him by acts symbolic of reinstatement in sonship. , quick! a most probable reading ( [130] [131] [132] ), and a most natural exclamation; obliterate the traces of a wretched past as soon as possible; off with these rags! fetch robes worthy of my son, dressed in his best as on a gala day. , bring from the house . , the first<\/em> robe, not in time, formerly worn (Theophy.), but in quality; cf.<\/em> the second chariot, Gen 41:43<\/span> ( currus secundus<\/em> , Bengel). (here only in N.T.): no epithet attached, golden, e.g.<\/em> (Wolff, golden<\/em> ring for sons, iron<\/em> ring for slaves); that it would be a ring of distinction goes without saying. , shoes; needed<\/em> he is barefoot and footsore; and worn by sons<\/em> , not by slaves. Robe, ring, shoes: all symbols of filial state.<\/p>\n [130] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.<\/p>\n [131] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.<\/p>\n [132] Codex Regius–eighth century, represents an ancient text, and is often in agreement with and B.<\/p>\n Luke<\/p>\n THE PRODIGAL AND HIS FATHER<\/p>\n GIFTS TO THE PRODIGAL<\/p>\n Luk 15:22 – Luk 15:23 <\/strong> .<\/p>\n God’s giving always follows His forgiving. It is not so with us. We think ourselves very magnanimous when we pardon; and we seldom go on to lavish favours where we have overlooked faults. Perhaps it is right that men who have offended against men should earn restoration by acts, and should have to ride quarantine, as it were, for a time. But I question whether forgiveness is ever true which is not, like God’s, attended by large-hearted gifts. If pardon is only the non-infliction of penalty, then it is natural enough that it should be considered sufficient by itself, and that the evildoer should not be rewarded for having been bad. But if pardon is the outflow of the love of the offended to the offender, then it can scarcely be content with simply giving the debtor his discharge, and turning him into the world penniless.<\/p>\n However that may be with regard to men, God’s forgiveness is essentially the communication of God’s love to us sinners, as if we had never sinned at all. And, that being so, that love cannot stay its working until it has given all that it can bestow or we can receive. God does not do things by halves; and He always gives when He forgives.<\/p>\n Now that is the great truth of the last part of this immortal parable. And it is one of the points in which it differs from, and towers high above, the two preceding ones. The lost sheep was carried back to the pastures, turned loose there, needed no further special care, and began to nibble as if nothing had happened. The lost drachma was simply put back in the woman’s purse. But the lost son was pardoned, and, being pardoned, was capable of receiving, and received, greater gifts than he had before. These gifts are very remarkably detailed in the words of our text.<\/p>\n Now, of course, it is always risky to seek for a spiritual interpretation of every point in a parable, many of which points are mere drapery. But, on the other hand, we may very easily fall into the error of treating as insignificant details which really are meant to be full of instruction. And I cannot help thinking-although many would differ from me,-that this detailed enumeration of the gifts to the prodigal is meant to be translated into the terms of spiritual experience. So I desire to look at them as suggesting for us the gifts of God which accompany forgiveness. I take the catalogue as it stands-the Robe, the Ring, the Shoes, the Feast.<\/p>\n I. First, the Robe.<\/p>\n <\/strong>‘Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him.’ That was the command. This detail, of course, like all the others, refers back to, and casts light upon, the supposed condition of the spendthrift when he came back. There he stood, ragged, with the stain of travel and the stench of the pig-sty upon his garments, some of them, no doubt, remains of the tawdry finery that he had worn in the world; wine-spots, and stains, and filth of all sorts on the rags. The father says, ‘Take them all off him, and put the best robe upon him.’ What does that mean?<\/p>\n Well, we all know the very familiar metaphor by which qualities of mind, traits of character, and the like are described as being the dress of the spirit. We talk about being ‘arrayed in purity,’ ‘clad in zeal,’ ‘clothed with humility,’ ‘vested with power,’ and so on. If we turn to Scripture, we find running through it a whole series of instances of this metaphor, which guide us at once to its true meaning. Zechariah saw in vision the high priest standing at the heavenly tribunal, clad in filthy garments. A voice said, ‘Take away the filthy garments from him,’ and the interpretation is added: ‘Behold! I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with a change of raiment.’ You remember our Lord’s parable of the man with a wedding garment. You remember the Apostle Paul’s frequent use of the metaphor of ‘putting off the old man, putting on the new.’ You remember, finally, the visions of the last days, in which the Seer in Patmos saw the armies in heaven that followed their victorious Commander, ‘clothed in fine linen, white and pure, which is the righteousness of the saints.’ If we put all these together, surely I am not forcing a meaning on a non-significant detail, when I say that here we have shadowed for us the great thought, that the result of the divine forgiveness coming upon a man is that he is clothed with a character which fits him to sit down at his Father’s table. They tell us that forgiveness is impossible, because things done must have their consequences, and that character is the slow formation of actions, precipitated, as it were, from our deeds. That is all true. But it does not conflict with this other truth that there may and does come into men’s hearts, when they set their faith on Jesus Christ, a new power which transforms the nature and causes old things to pass away.<\/p>\n God’s forgiveness revolutionises a life. Similar effects follow even human pardons for small offences. Brute natures are held in by penalties, and to them pardon means impunity, and impunity means licence, and licence means lust. But wherever there is a heart with love to the offended in it, there is nothing that will so fill it with loathing of its past self as the assurance that the offended, though loved, One loves, and is not offended, and that free forgiveness has come. Whether is it the rod or the mother’s kiss that makes a child hate its sin most? And if we lift our thoughts to Him, and think how He, up there in the heavens,<\/p>\n ‘Who mightest vengeance best have took,’<\/p>\n <\/em> bends over us in frank, free forgiveness, then surely that, more than all punishments or threatenings or terrors, will cause us to turn away from our evil, and to loathe the sins which are thus forgiven. The prophet went very deep when he said, ‘Thou shalt be ashamed and confounded, and never open thy mouth any more because of thine iniquity, when I am pacified towards thee for all that thou hast done, saith the Lord.’<\/p>\n But not only so, there is given along with forgiveness, and wrapped up in it, a new power, which makes all things new, and changes a man. It would be a poor Gospel for me to stand up and preach if I had only to proclaim to men the divine forgiveness; and if that only meant that hell’s door was barred and some outward heaven was flung open. But the true Gospel offers forgiveness as preliminary to the bestowal of the highest gifts of God. The pardoned man is stripped of his rags and clothed with a new nature which God Himself bestows.<\/p>\n That is what we all need. We have not all been in the pig-sty; we have not all fallen into gross sin. We Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n