The Prodigal God: Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith

In keeping with Keller’s broader message that Both Brothers Are Lost, he reframes what might appear to be a single narrative as a two-act drama. Each act centers on one of the brothers and, through him, a particular kind of spiritual alienation—one based in rebellion and the other, paradoxically, in compliance. This foreshadows the core thesis of Chapter 3, which is that there are two basic life paths through which humans seek happiness. In the meantime, however, Keller draws attention to the parallels between the stories, which redefine sin and lostness. Both sons are lost because they desire the father’s possessions, not the father himself. The younger son overtly demands his father’s wealth, while the elder brother’s speech reveals a transactional relationship; his complaint about never receiving a goat while his brother gets the calf exposes his strategy of using obedience to place the father in his debt. This ultimately lays the groundwork for the text’s exploration of Sin as Self-Salvation, as despite superficial differences, both sons are ultimately motivated by the desire to extract something they feel they need or deserve rather than trusting in their father and his love for them. 

The two-act structure also allows Keller to separate discussion of grace from discussion of its cost. The first act, centered on the younger son, illustrates unconditional forgiveness but is incomplete, as the story’s purpose extends beyond affirming mercy. The second act reveals the literal cost of the father’s mercy via the elder brother’s complaint; the younger son’s restoration to the family cuts into the wealth of both his father and his brother. However, the father’s willingness to endure not only this material price but also the elder brother’s rebukes begins to hint at a more figurative cost and thus to establish the framework for the text’s later claims about Costly Grace and the True Elder Brother. 

Keller’s overarching reading of the parable draws on various schools and methodologies, but this chapter in particular illustrates his reliance on historical/cultural criticism—especially the research of biblical scholar Kenneth Bailey. The younger son’s request for his inheritance and the elder son’s public refusal to enter the feast are profound acts of disrespect that publicly shame their father, highlighting both sons’ alienation. The father character’s unconditional, sacrificial grace similarly defies the era’s social norms. His countercultural actions begin when he grants the younger son’s demand for his inheritance, liquidating not just assets but part of his own bios (“life”) and community standing. By running to embrace his son before any confession and by gifting him a robe and feast, the father continues to defy expectations. Throughout all of this, the father freely absorbs the cost and shame himself—a significant sacrifice, Keller explains, in a patriarchal, honor-based culture.

Ultimately, the point of this culturally informed reading is to underscore how radical the parable would have been to listeners at the time. As Keller’s purpose is to challenge readers similarly, he pairs his exegesis with various references to contemporary culture, such as the analogy of a “powerful and successful CEO[] […] chucking their whole career[] to care for a hurting, needy child” (23), or of “a son writing a humiliating tell-all memoir that destroys his father’s reputation and career” (31). Similarly, he breaks off his argumentation in much the same place the story ends. As Keller explains, the unresolved ending clarifies the parable’s polemical intent, forcing the original audience of Pharisees to confront a subtle spiritual alienation, creating an open-ended ethical challenge and implicating the audience by leaving the elder brother’s choice unstated. Keller similarly leaves readers hanging, inviting them to examine their own response to the story before continuing.