Message for Luke 15:1-10

14 Pentecost C

September 11, 2022

I wish I could have a tranquil faith. I wish I could never stray from the safe path. I wish I could always jump in the right direction. Alas, that’s not me – never has been. When it comes to following Jesus, I’m a lot like the lamb in this video.

Some of that travail is years in the past. But it’s no less painful or powerful. So, when God reached out in Jesus to find me and bring me back, I thought it was a joke. When I heard the voice of God telling me to go to seminary, I was sure God had the wrong number. When the Holy Spirit blessed me with a call into ministry, I was positive that someone would figure out pretty quickly just how much of an imposter I was in this God and grace business.

Yet, the joke was on me.

That’s why I connect so personally to our gospel reading. Jesus will eat with anyone. Prior to Luke 15, Jesus has eaten with Pharisees at least three times. These meals erupt in controversy, but that doesn’t mean the meals were failures. That’s just what happens when you get some teachers together to debate the finer points of the Torah.

Jesus will eat with anyone, regardless of theological, social, or political inclination. That’s worth noting in a time when we tend to gather more and more only with people who look, think, talk, and behave like us. Then, as now, eating with anyone and everyone is a countercultural activity.

Jesus also accepts dinner invitations from the “wrong” kinds of people. He parties with the poor and the rich, the reviled and the respectable. It’s not bad enough that he sits down at the table with the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. He’s having a good old time with traitors and collaborators, with those who play fast and loose with their religion and probably fast and loose with a lot of other rules as well.

Why does Jesus welcome sinners and eat with them? Maybe it’s because, as Billy Joel noted, “the sinners are much more fun.” But I think it’s also because when there’s a chance to throw someone a lifeline, Jesus is going to do it. If Jesus finds someone who’s lost, Jesus is going to move heaven and earth to find them.

That message saves lives. I was privileged to be part of a congregational prison ministry called the FEAST. Part of that ministry was and is a Sunday meal together including inmates from the community corrections center, members of the congregation, and other volunteers, family, and friends.

I remember a FEAST partner (we call our inmate friends “partners” in that ministry) who was sure there was a catch to all of this. Nobody in their right mind would do this for free, he thought. “What do you people really want from me?” he asked. “We’d like to know how you want your burger cooked,” one of the volunteers replied.

We hoped our time together might change all of us for the better. But that wasn’t a condition for being together. Over time, my friend began to soften a bit. He was less defensive and paranoid. His shoulders relaxed. He even smiled a few times. After a few months, he came to me with a broad grin. “I’ve figured it out,” he told me. “I know what you people want.”

“Well, tell me,” I said, “what is it that ‘we people’ want?” He laughed as he spoke. “You don’t want anything. You just give yourselves and your time and your love for free. It’s the craziest thing I’ve ever seen. I didn’t think such a thing was possible. But do you know what really gets me?” he asked. “No,” I said, “I have no idea. Tell me.”

“All of a sudden, for the first time in my life, I don’t want anything either. Because,” he took a deep breath, “I know that God wants to give me everything.”

If I hadn’t been there myself, I wouldn’t have believed it. Yet, nearly twenty years later, that conversation rings in my mind as clearly as the Sunday we had it. It didn’t work that way every time. Some never got over their suspicion. Some took what they could get and left. But many more had precisely the same experience. After a lifetime of judgment and punishment, grace changed their hearts and their lives.

The story may sound like a cheesy exercise in self-congratulation. I apologize if that’s what you get. What I know is that those of us who appeared to be on the “giving” end of the deal were (and are) the ones who benefitted the most. I’m not sure I’ve ever had a greater privilege than to watch week in and week out as living, breathing human beings were transformed by the power of God’s grace in Christ. That grace was embodied in meals, friendship, acceptance, and love.

I still get chills when I remember this experience.

Why does Jesus welcome sinners and eat with them? The sinners are more fun. I suspect there really is more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over the ninety-nine righteous who need no repentance. The challenge to the ninety-nine is to accept the joy when such a transformation happens.

This works out different ways in different settings. But the challenge of the Good News is there for all of us. In the last few weeks, Jesus has made it clear that he offers real freedom to those who fully follow him. When we receive and accept that invitation, can we take joy in offering that freedom to others?

If we reflect the image and likeness of God in our lives and conduct, we Jesus followers won’t be satisfied while any sheep and coins are still lost. Part of our calling is to understand that we are incomplete, that we are lost as long as we settle for flocks made up only of people like us.

God won’t settle for a partial victory. God is not content with finding most of the family, but not all. If we are thinking practically, we know that the sheep-owner should have settled for the ninety-nine lambs who stayed home. If we are thinking practically, we know that the woman should not have turned her house upside down for a coin that either would turn up on its own or could be replaced.

But today we meet the impractical God. Today we meet the God who will not stop looking until all have been found, reclaimed, returned, and restored. When God finds us in Jesus, will we join the search for the others? God wants all of us, and God wants us all. Let’s pray…

Text Study for Luke 15:1-10 (Part Five)

All three of these parables seem more than a bit “over the top.” The sheep owner leaves the ninety-nine to search for the wandering lamb. Upon finding the lost one, the owner doesn’t go back to the remaining flock. Instead, the owner heads home and throws a party. The woman turns the house upside down and inside out to find the displaced drachma. Then she spends that drachma, and perhaps more, to host a party celebrating the recovery of the precious coin. These are odd behaviors.

What if these parables are part of Jesus’ stand-up routine, rather than neat little morality tales? I have found Doole’s article on observational comedy helpful in reflection on these texts. I hope you might take the time to read it yourself, but I’ll hit the high spots as I continue my message preparation for Sunday. Doole argues, based on contemporary research, that the Lukan account is the funniest of the gospels. He seeks to demonstrate that our parables are not only sharply critical of Jesus’ opponents but that this criticism is couched in the language of laughter.

Todd Strong describes the process of comedy writing. He suggests that most of the jokes we tell involve some degree of exaggeration. “Exaggeration jokes work by first evoking a fairly common, day-to-day image,” Strong writes, “and then exaggerating one or more aspects of that image to such an extent that the ensuing pictures in the minds of the audience members become ridiculous, and funny.” That sounds a great deal like our two parables (and the third one, as well, but that’s for another time).

To illustrate his point, Strong invokes the work of Nebraska native son, Johnny Carson, whom Strong describes as a “master at telling exaggeration jokes.” Carson’s trademark line – “it was so (small, big, fat, skinny, etc.”) followed by the audience response – “How (blank) was it?” became a cultural staple for a generation of television viewers. The set-up gets listeners to imagine the scene in question from their own experience. The punch line takes that standard imagination and exaggerates it to absurdity.

The description in the previous paragraph is almost a schematic of our two parables. Jesus invites his listeners to imagine the scene. “Which man of you?” Jesus asks the crowd. Immediately, they are imagining themselves as sheep owners. With that dynamic established, Jesus doesn’t have to ask the question about the woman. Listeners are already there. By extension, Jesus doesn’t have to ask the question about the father. Listeners are immediately thinking about their own family situations.

Then Jesus ratchets the absurdity to extremes. Doole points to this joke-telling practice in a number of Jesus’ parables: the friend at midnight in Luke 11, the persistent widow in Luke 18, the great banquet in Luke 14, the unjust steward, and the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. Each of these stories observes some typical human behavior and then elevates that behavior to the heights of folly. “So,” Doole summarizes, “it is interesting that previous research has already demonstrated the significant role of humor in Luke 14 and Luke 16, which surely suggests that Luke 15 is fertile ground for further investigation of Jesus’s humour in Luke’ (page 185).

If the Doole’s argument is valid, then a first conclusion has to do with the tone of our messages on our text. When possible and appropriate, I think it’s helpful for a message to reflect not only the content of the text in question but also the tone and style of the text. Stories tend to call forth more stories. Jokes elicit more jokes. The tactic Jesus uses in our text is to get the folks laughing and then gently slip the rhetorical knife between their ribs at the end.

Of course, we must remember the words of actor Edmund Gwenn as he faced the end of his life. A visitor commiserated that his journey toward mortality must be terribly difficult for Gwenn. “Dying is easy,” Gwenn is supposed to have replied, “Comedy is difficult.” Even that deathbed line is an example of the nature of comedy – human situation raised to an absurd level and then then punch line lands. Any experienced preacher knows the truth of that (exaggerated) sentiment about comedy. Nonetheless, if Doole is right, we have our invitation right in the text.

Now, what about the details of our own comedic parables? Doole notes that Jesus is speaking to a mixed audience where the potential for laughing at one group and with another is great. “At this point in the Gospel,” Doole writes, “we have a mixed group, the perfect audience for the observations of Jesus on social absurdities” (page 187). In addition, standup comedy depends on audience interaction. Clearly, Jesus calls for that interaction as he begins the parable in Luke 15:4.

The Lukan author was apparently familiar with the conventions of classical humor. Doole notes five such conventions. Humor was a feature of the meals known as symposia, where a variety of people is present and where dialogue and debate are on the menu. The Lukan account would be half its current size if such gatherings were deleted from the text.

Speakers entertain the guests by comparing typical and exaggerated human characteristics or behavior. Common sense wisdom is used to make elite behaviors appear foolish. While the punchlines are joyful, they still put the Pharisees and scribes “in their place.” And the humor can be used for persuasion and/or censure, not only for entertainment (pages 189-190). The parables of the lost and found fit these parameters and would speak to the modestly elite target audience of the Lukan account.

So, on to the parables. Doole suggests that going after the lost sheep is not unusual behavior, in the experience of the audience. What’s crazy is that the sheep owner doesn’t go back to the ninety-nine. The audience might have seen this as careless and even ridiculous. Perhaps this was a typical rookie mistake or the work of one who was not going to be a shepherd for long. In the same way, the woman’s reaction is out of all proportion to the value of the coin. But just as some shepherds might have made a rookie mistake, so some women might have succumbed to such irrational exuberance.

The charming foolishness of the sheep owner and the woman pales in comparison to that of the forgiving father. Here Doole reminds us of Paul’s words regarding the foolishness of God in 1 Corinthians, chapter 1. That’s a worthwhile connection to make in our messages. When it comes to being rescued from ourselves and this broken world, there’s a real sense in which “the joke’s on us!”

“Luke’s story of the two sons, just like those of the sheep and coin, draws on observation of human behavior when people are confronted with loss,” Doole writes, “and the disproportionate joy that defies traditional values when that which was lost is recovered. We can all laugh at the actions of the father because we see our own foolishness in him,” Doole continues, “Yet the implied meaning of this joke is that God acts in the same foolish way” (page 204).

“The joke,” Doole concludes, “is on those who thought they understood God” (page 207). That’s an idea that’ll preach.

I have had no reason to expect that things would turn out well between God and me. I envy those folks whose journey with God has been relatively straightforward and uneventful. I don’t have that gift of a modestly tranquil faith. I am the sheep who nibbled itself lost. I am the coin who fell between the couch cushions. I am the son who told a variety of families that I had no interest in what they offered. Like the lamb, I fell into ditches. Like the coin I sat useless in the dark. Like the son, I hoped for a measure of survival but despaired of the possibility of acceptance and love.

Some of that travail is years in the past, but it’s no less painful or powerful. So, when God reached out in Jesus to find me and bring me back, I thought it was a joke. When I heard the voice of God telling me to go to seminary, I was sure that God must have the wrong number. When the Holy Spirit blessed me with a call into ministry, I was positive that someone would figure out pretty quickly just how much of an imposter I was in this God and grace business.

Yet, the joke was on me. And it continues to be on me. I return over and over to the words of Brennan Manning. In The Furious Longing of God, he writes, “Those of us scarred by sin are called to closeness with Him (sic) around the banquet table. The kingdom of God is not a subdivision for the self-righteous or for those who lay claim to private visions of doubtful authenticity and boast they possess the state secret of their salvation. No,” Manning continues, “The men and women who are truly filled with light are those who have gazed deeply into the darkness of their own imperfect existence” (page 32).

And there are the words of Cory Asbury’s “Reckless Love” — “Oh, the overwhelming, never-ending, reckless love of God Oh, it chases me down, fights ’til I’m found, leaves the ninety-nine. I couldn’t earn it, and I don’t deserve it, still, You give Yourself away. Oh, the overwhelming, never-ending, reckless love of God, yeah…”

Yeah.

Resources and References

Abraham, Heather R. “Segregation Autopilot: How the Government Perpetuates Segregation and How to Stop It.” https://ssrn.comb/abstract=4006587.

Burke, Trevor J. “The parable of the prodigal father: an interpretative key to the third Gospel (Luke 15: 11-32).” Tyndale bulletin 64, no. 2 (2013): 216-238.

Capon, Robert Farrar. Kingdom, Grace, Judgment: Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus. Kindle Edition.

Dinkler, Michal Beth. ““The Thoughts of Many Hearts Shall Be Revealed”: Listening in on Lukan Interior Monologues.” Journal of Biblical Literature 134, no. 2 (2015): 373-399.

Doole, J. Andrew. “Observational Comedy in Luke 15.” Neotestamentica 50, no. 1 (2016): 181–210. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26417475.

Kilgallen, John. “Was Jesus Right to Eat with Sinners and Tax Collectors?” Biblica 93, no. 4 (2012): 590–600. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42617310.

Levine, Amy-Jill. Short Stories by Jesus. HarperOne. Kindle Edition.

Levine, Amy-Jill, and Witherington III, Ben. The Gospel of Luke (New Cambridge Bible Commentary). Cambridge University Press, 2018.

Malina, Bruce, and Rohrbaugh, Richard L. Social Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels. Kindle Edition.

Mannermaa, Tuomo. Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious World. Kindle Edition.

Manning, Brennan. The Furious Longing of God. David C. Cook, 2009.

Swanson, Richard W. Provoking the Gospel of Luke: A Storyteller’s Commentary, Year C. Cleveland, OH.: Pilgrim Press, 2006.

Swanson, Richard W. https://provokingthegospel.wordpress.com/2022/03/20/a-provocation-4th-sunday-in-lent-march-27-2022-luke-151-3-11-32/.

Volf, Miroslav. Free of Charge: Giving and Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2005.

Wright, N. T. Luke for Everyone (The New Testament for Everyone). Westminster John Knox Press. Kindle Edition.

Text Study for Luke 15:1-10 (Part Four)

Just a reminder, friends, that I’m back in the weekly preaching business for a while. So, I’m even more interested in your feedback and comments than previously. Please feel free to add comments to my posts. I’d be glad to hear your thoughts regarding the texts, the posts, and your own reflections as we move toward the crafting of messages for our worshipping communities.

“Was Jesus right,” John Kilgallen asks in his Biblica article, “to eat with sinners and tax collectors?” Kilgallen notes that the Pharisees were also in favor of the repentance of sinners. In the Lukan account and elsewhere, however, it is clear that they differ with Jesus on their outreach strategy. The reported strategy of the Pharisees was to avoid contact with the sinners.

This strategy, according to Kilgallen, accomplished two things. It kept the Pharisees from being influenced toward sin by the sinners. And it communicated the disapproval which might lead such sinners to a change in worldview and resulting behavior. “If the Pharisees held other Israelites in lesser esteem,” he writes, “it was only as a confirmation of their impatience with sins and sinners against the Law” (page 590).

I think it’s important to be fair and accurate in our portrayal of the Pharisees in the Lukan account. It is not fair and accurate to suggest that, somehow, they did not care about the welfare of the “tax collectors and sinners.” They sought the holiness and wholeness of the people of God. They put more emphasis, perhaps on the “holiness” than Jesus did. But that was a difference in strategy and not a lack of care.

Jesus, on the other hand, chose to approach the sinners – to welcome them and eat with them. As we’ve noted previously, one realistic concern was that such interaction would communicate approval and therefore would not lead to repentance and reform. Kilgallen suggests that the Lukan author is at pains to show that Jesus’ outreach strategy was successful and, in addition, received the Divine stamp of approval.

It might be worth the time, in a sermon, to track Jesus’ consistent path in the Lukan account when it came to welcoming and eating with sinners. In Luke 5, Jesus calls Levi, the tax collector, to follow him as a disciple. Levi answers the call. “And abandoning everything, [Levi] got up and followed him” (Luke 5:28, my translation). This little verse vibrates with verbs. Levi leaves it all behind. The verb for “getting up” is a cognate for “resurrection.” Was Levi dead and now alive, according to the Lukan author? I wonder.

Levi hosts a huge feast in his home. Jesus and his disciples are the guests of honor. The word for “joy” is not in the text, but it’s fair to presume that the feast was fun. The Pharisees and their scribes “grumble” to Jesus’ disciples. That’s a form of the same verb in 15:2, applied once again to the Pharisees and their scribes. “What’s the reason you (pl) eat and drink with the tax collectors and sinners?” (Luke 5:30b, my translation). It’s clear that this is a textual companion to the opening of Luke 15.

Jesus replies to the grumbling. “The healthy have no need for a healer; instead, the ones in a bad way have such a need. I have not come to call the just ones but rather sinners into repentance” (Luke 5:31b-32, my translation). As Kilgallen notes, this description is not an argument in favor of Jesus’ strategy but rather a simple assertion of that strategy. The argument comes as we move through the Lukan narrative.

Kilgallen next takes us to Luke 7. Jesus compares himself to John the Baptist and says, “There’s just no pleasing the people of this generation!” John the Baptist was an ascetic prophet, and they accused him of having a demon (Luke 7:33). Jesus (“the Son of Man”) has come “eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look! A man who is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners. And Wisdom is justified on the basis of all her children.” (Luke 7:34b-35, my translation).

The cryptic proverb is the key to this text, according to Kilgallen. A wise understanding of Jesus’ strategy looks at the results, the outcomes, “the children” produced by the strategy. To drive home the point, the Lukan author takes us to a dinner in the home of Simon the Pharisee. There, a woman bathes Jesus’ feet with her tears and dries them with her hair. The Pharisee expects Jesus to distance himself from the woman. Jesus welcomes her overture.

The difference in strategy is clear. And the results are obvious. The woman’s sins are forgiven. She has shown great love. She has enacted and embodied that love, at great risk to herself, in a highly visible fashion. Her trust has saved her, and she can go in peace. This is how Jesus’ outreach strategy works in practice.

Now we come to our parables in Luke 15. Kilgallen suggests two lessons from the first two parables. “They show us that it is unremitting searching that finds what was lost, not disinterest in or distance from the sheep. Certainly,” he continues, “leaving them lost achieves not a thing.” The second lesson is that finding the lost produces joy and celebration. This second lesson “confirms the value of searching, achieving happiness for going after what was lost until it was found.” For Jesus, searching is the only way to bring about repentance (page 596).

The third parable makes clear the stakes of the searching and finding. This is a matter of life and death for the one who is lost. The father says that the lost son was dead and is now alive. Remember that when Levi responds to the call to discipleship, he rises up to follow. The joy evidenced in the finding finds its way to heaven itself. Kilgallen argues, “whatever can produce joy in heaven is worth doing. One cannot prefer not searching after sinners, if one is convinced that such searching is the way, the best and necessary way, to produce joy, and life” (page 597).

This third approach to welcoming sinners and eating with them gives the justification for Jesus’ outreach strategy. “That heaven rejoices over the result of Jesus’ winning over sinners is assurance that the means is justified by its effect,” Kilgallen writes. This heavenly celebration is “further proof that Jesus’ way of trying to convert sinners to repentance is valid” (page 597). But there is one more story – specific and personal.

As we’ve noted before, this trajectory in the Lukan account climaxes with the story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19. Zacchaeus climbs a tree to get a better view of the parade. Jesus calls him down and invites himself to Zacchaeus’ home, presumably for a meal. Zacchaeus responds with joyful repentance. He promises to fulfill the Torah concerned with reparations and repayment. What’s not to like?

Yet, the story is interrupted by familiar words in verse 7. “And when they saw this, all were grumbling and said, ‘He has gone down to enter the house of a man who is a sinner” (my translation). The vocabulary is rich here. We have the same verb for “grumbling” that we found in Luke 15. Now it’s not just the Pharisees and the scribes who grumble, but rather all who saw it. The verb for “going” has the clear sense of “going down” (the kata- prefix in the Greek). Jesus is “lowering himself,” they say, by entering the home of this notorious sinner.

“For our purposes,” Kilgallen writes, “the most striking feature we find in this story is the fact that we have been given a clear example of the result which comes from Jesus’ fraternizing with sinners” (page 598). In regard to our text, Kilgallen argues, “These parables are meant to encourage those sinners who listen favorably to Jesus, but equally are meant to make clear to Jesus’ critics the supreme value of his efforts to encourage repentance” (599). The Lukan author is at pains to demonstrate that Jesus’ outreach strategy is effective, ratified by heavenly celebration, and gives life in the midst of death.

So, what do we preachers do with this analysis? We have the good news that the God who comes to us in Jesus seeks us relentlessly to save us. I’m not sure if I’ll use any quotes from Francis Thompson’s The Hound of Heaven, but such quotes would be well-placed. We have the great privilege to share that good news with any and all. And we have the rule of thumb that if it’s good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for us. The strategy for responding to “sinners” is to welcome them and eat with them, whatever that means.

We should observe that in this strategy, Jesus never hosted a single dinner himself. He went out. He got himself invited. He invited himself. He was interesting and enjoyable enough to generate the invitations. He engaged in dialogue and debate. He stirred the theological pot. He was “out there,” and that’s our place as Jesus followers too.