Lostness

We dislike the word lost.  That dislike prevents some persons from considering the meaning of lost-ness, even in inconsequential matters.  It has several contexts, one of which is spiritual, but all contexts of lost-ness are presumed to be negative.  It can be used in a positive sense, but that is simply juggling language, as we often do with words.  For example I may say that I have lost a bad habit.  I can’t lose a bad habit.  I might overcome it in thought and action but it was not lost.  Disappearance is not the clear meaning of lost.  I may overcome anger, but I don’t lose it.  It was overcome, defeated, trashed for what it is, a drag on my person preventing me from becoming what I was meant to become.  It hasn’t been lost, but defeated.  To be lost is to be separated from the context in which the lost factor is supposed to be found, but also to lose the meaning of that factor pertaining during the period of lostness.  We tend to understand the process and consequences when dealing with a substance (like losing the keys to the car), but miss it when we do not have a tangible object.  For example, a person offers a new idea, perhaps communicates it in a letter to a colleague.  The colleague picks up on it, publishes it with additions in a book without reference to the originator or that there was a person other than this author who held the idea before this revealing book. The originator protests that he has lost his idea to another in what is called plagiarism.  There are copyright laws that assist originators not to lose what belonged to them in primacy.  As this is being written the society is trying to figure out, in the internet age, how to protect intellectual property from being lost in the general winds that blow through the masses of public life.  A similar concern applies to the patents in research that are being lost in the stealing of some nations the discoveries made in others, so to deny to the originators their rights of first possession until sharing programs are met and limitations kept.  To lose the rights of possession is understood as stolen (loss).  It is a loss that is perceived as thievery.  It is lost-ness in which the originator continues to know the new concept, but loss of control of created possession becomes lost-ness.  When I was a kid, the saying was common: Losers, weepers; finders, keepers.  The brazen person holds that if it is stolen, its his.  He keeps it. The increase for one is loss for the other.

Luke’s Gospel, Chapter 15, is devoted to the theme of lost-ness.  Luke uses various analogies so to gain understanding of the most important application he wants to make.  In this chapter, Jesus is speaking to representatives of all people.  His parable begins with a lost sheep, then to the lost coin, and then to the lost son.  Here he follows at length the story we have come to know as the parable of the Prodigal Son.  We would be clear in Jesus’ meaning of his words to identify the passage as the Parable of the Lost Son, which is the wording from Jesus.  Lost-ness is the point from sheep, to coin, to son.  Even though Jesus wants to be clear about spiritual lost-ness, his purpose was to make clear that to be lost, and to be found is cause to forgive, rejoice, and love in the recovery.  The lesson was not so much in the prodigal, but in the father and the brother.  The father (representing God, looked longingly for the return of the departed lost son), and the brother (representing the people listening to Jesus’ words missed the feelings of the father so did not represent an understanding of forgiveness that should bring joy when that which is lost is found).  It was not so much the lost-ness of the prodigal that related to the parable of Jesus, but the neutrality (at best) of the observers, and the disbelief that the prodigal was lost – not merely wandering about to get hold of himself, but returning and penitent so to gain the forgiveness of the loving father.  Neither revenge nor shame fit. The return was to celebration – not for judgment.  The public, like the brother, would judge the prodigal,  the father rejoices for that which was lost to him is found – as a person rejoices that the lady rejoices that her valuable coin was found.  If we can rejoice on the finding of insignificant factors, in contrast a person, there is something that is not understood about God, faith and rescue.  The saga continues in our time when the drama is between those who understand God is yearning for imperfect mankind, and rejoicing when that understanding (of situation and rescue) is embraced.  If we doubt lost-ness between man and God, we likely have no belief in redemptive enterprise, so no reason for rejoicing in rescue.