Sermon Tone Analysis

I. Introduction

Inheritance by definition implies a distribution of property upon the death of a relative.

In our society it is usually upon the death on one’s parents.

However, it could be upon the death of one’s grandparents, or a childless relative such as an aunt, uncle or even a sibling.

Some folk may even remember various organizations in their wills.

Maybe some people while alive, had experienced a tough time when a total stranger came to their rescue.

The stranger helped them out of the kindness of their heart with no thought of receiving anything in return.

Not expecting even so much as a thank you, let alone any monetary gift, years later they are informed that this total stranger included them, a non-family member, in their will.

Inheritance in the Ancient, biblical world

In the ancient, biblical world, all property belonged to the head of household, the man.

When a man and a woman married, any property the woman owned, became the property of her husband.

If they were childless and the husband passed, his property reverted to oldest surviving brother who also had the responsibility of marrying his surviving spouse.

If they had children, the property was divided between them, but not equally.

The oldest son received a double portion.

For example, if the marriage produced three sons, the property would be divided into four parts.

The eldest son would receive 2/4 or 1/2 of the property with the remaining two sons each receiving 1/4 of the estate.

II.

Story Context

Our text today occurs in the Bible immediately following two other parables.

The first is a “Parable of the Lost Sheep.”

Biblical scholars entitled the second as “The Parable of the Lost Coin.”

The third parable is “The Parable of the Lost Son,” which many also refer to as “The Prodigal Son” story.

Scripture Reading in NASB Luke 15:1-24

Must convert to cash, must sell non-liquid assets

11 And He said, “A man had two sons.

12 The younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me he share of the estate that falls to me.’

So he divided his wealth between them.

13 And not many days later, the younger son gathered everything together and went on a journey into a distant country, and there he squandered his estate with loose living.

14 Now when he had spent everything, a severe famine occurred in that country, and he began to be impoverished.

15 So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.

16 And he would have gladly filled his stomach with the pods that the swine were eating, and no one was giving anything to him.

17 But when he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have more than enough bread, but I am dying here with hunger!

18 ‘I will get up and go to my father, and will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight; 19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me as one of your hired men.” ’ 20 “So he got up and came to his father.

But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion for him, and ran and embraced him and kissed him.

21 And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ 22 But the father said to his slaves, ‘Quickly bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet; 23 and bring the fattened calf, kill it, and let us eat and celebrate; 24 for this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’

And they began to celebrate.

Community would realize father divesting

Shamed in front of peers

Community would realize son was ungrateful

Shamed in front of peers

III.

Younger Son

Wanted inheritance while Father alive

The younger son wanted his inheritance now, immediately.

He did not want to wait until his father died.

That might be years down the road.

He wanted to enjoy the benefits now while he was a young man.

So he went to his father.

He demanded his inheritance share of the property that would be due him, now.

His father agreed to his son’s demand.

Since there were two sons the property would be divided into thirds.

Also, he was the younger son.

That meant his share of the inheritance would be 1/3 of the father’s assets.

One third of everything his father owned at the moment, not what he might own just prior to death.

Conversion of property in the ancient world

Conversion of property

Wealth in biblical times was determined by land owned, animals currently being raised, crops ready for harvest or already stored on the property, and any coinage that might be in his father’s purse since the banking industry did not exist at that time.

In order to give the younger son his portion of the estate, the father had to sell all the non-liquid assets.

The property - land, animals, crops - had to be converted to cash.

Conversion of property

There was no way the father could liquidate his property on the Q-T.

Everyone in the region would know the father was divesting.

Unlike today when you could just sign a contract with a realtor or put an add in either the paper, he had either personally contact people in the community or send a trusted emissary to represent him.

The entire community would realize the father was divesting of a portion of his estate.

Everyone in the community knew how much land the father owned.

They would know how large a herd of animals he held.

They would be aware of the type and amount of crops he raised.

They also knew how much he was selling.

He had to go, with hat in hand, to his neighbors to find a buyer.

They could do the math.

Even if they were never told the reason for the sale, they could figure out what 1/3 would be.

Without ever being told, they would make the connection that he was converting to cash the assets equivalent to the younger son’s portion of his inheritance.

By selling one third of his estate to give the proceeds to his youngest son would fodder for community gossip.

The entire community would talk about the son’s various indiscretions.

The entire community would believe the father failed in the upbringing of his youngest son.

The father would be blamed for his son’s indiscretions.

In essence, the father was shamed in front of his peers.

Squandered his inheritance

Community would realize son was ungrateful

Shamed in front of peers

Squandered his inheritance

Squandered his inheritance

Scripture tells us that not long after the father gave his youngest son the monetary proceeds which was the worth of this son’s inheritance, that the young man took everything he owned and left home.

He did not go looking for a job.

He did not go looking for investment opportunities.

He did not stay in close proximity to the community in which he was raised.

Instead he went to a distant land, a land that was not only far way, but one in which his reputation would not have preceded him.

He foolishly went to have a good time.

That was his sole purpose.

He lived wastefully.

Not keeping track of his money and with no means of replenishing what he spent, he caroused and partied.

Oblivious to the fact that his money would sooner or later run out, he continued having a good time.

He spent everything he had on riotous living.

Destitution brings about reality

It was not a good time to be broke.

It was not a good time to be literally penniless.

There was a famine in the country.

Without money, he soon became hungry.

He began looking for a job.

A farmer took pity on him.