Read Luke
10:25-37
This is one of the more familiar parables in the Bible. The term Good Samaritan is so common these
days that we forget what a contradiction in terms, what an oxymoron it would
have been to use this term 2000 years ago.
The term Good Samaritan is not even used in the
scripture. This is a title or pericope
heading that attached itself to the text in later years. In Luke’s Gospel, this story is sandwiched in
between the sending of the 72 and a very personal encounter with Mary who truly
valued her time with Jesus and Martha who remained wrapped up in things of the
world.
This parable begins with a question. It is a question from a teacher of the law
who is seeking to best Jesus in public more than he is seeking an answer.
The teacher asks, what must I do to inherit eternal life.
Jesus answers with a question and the teacher replies: Love the Lord with all you heart, soul,
strength, and mind; and to love your neighbor as yourself.
Jesus replies, yes you got the right answer. Do this and you will live.
There is another train of thought that could be pursued
here—he didn’t say the words, Jesus is Lord or whosoever believeth in hiim, and
Jesus told him he would live if he did these four things. We don’t have a ticket for that train at this
time. Perhaps we will board that train on
another day.
The teacher wants to take one more shot and asks who
is my neighbor?
Jesus tells the parable, in which we can easily see five or
six main characters. The robbers set the
story in motion by ambushing a man.
The man is probably a Jew.
Jesus was talking to a teacher of the law and most of the people around
him at this time were likely Jews. The
man was one of them. The crowd likely
had empathy for the man.
Next we have the priest and the Levite. Both see the man and pass by on the other
side. Our reaction in the twenty-first
century is often look at how
sanctimonious these religious leaders were. We have seen that holier than thou attitude
before.
These two might have received a little more sympathy from
the Jewish crowd. After all, Priests had
to remain clean and pure to fulfill their duties in the temple. Some might have said, they were just
following the law and the provisions and commentaries on the law found in the
Talmud and Mishnah. The teacher of the
law, however, should have known that the Mishnah provided and exception to
these restrictive guidelines when encountering an abandon corpse.
If we take the words literally that both the Priest and the
Levite are going down the road, then they were leaving Jerusalem which was
several hundred feet above sea level and Jericho was below sea level. Today, we might say that we were going down
the road and in western Oklahoma that term may or may not connote a change in
altitude. But if the priest and the
Levite were both going down, then they were leaving Jerusalem, traveling the
same direction as the man, and thus would have concluded any temple duties which
would have required purification.
In any case, both passed the man on the other side of the
road.
Next we come to the Samaritan. I would suspect that there might have even
been a few boos and hisses at the mention of this character. It’s not that there was underlying racial
hatred towards the Samaritans. There was
overt racial hatred towards these “half breeds.” Whether the roots of this hatred go back to
the time of the Babylonian Captivity or were a more recent development really
doesn’t bear on the situation. Racial
hatred is racial hatred and it is not going to be dispelled by finding the
historical roots. Hatred is a condition
of the heart and many in the crowd that was listening likely had this hatred
ingrained in their hearts.
When Jesus asks the teacher of the law which one of the
three was a neighbor to the man who was robbed, the teacher replies the one who
showed mercy. Perhaps this is just the
teacher revealing his insight into the parable or perhaps it is his reluctance
to say the word Samaritan without spitting at the same time.
But it is the Samaritan who does what most had hoped the
priest or the Levite would do. He cares
for the man with his own oil, and wine, and beast of burden. He brings him to an Inn and doesn’t drop him
off. He cares for him overnight. The next day, he pays the innkeeper in
advance and tells him that he will settle accounts upon his return and pay him
anything else that he is due. The
Samaritan truly shows love and mercy.
There is another human character in this story, one who has
no lines to say or action, but who perhaps has something to reveal. That is the innkeeper. He accepts the Samaritan at his word that he
will make good on any expense incurred by the innkeeper. This tells us that he either witnessed
something that inspired trust in the Samaritan or there was an existing
relationship. In either case, the
innkeeper agrees—at least we hear of no objection—to keep and care for the
beaten man.
Others throughout history have interpreted this parable
allegorically. Origin Adamatius, one of
the church fathers that lived in the second and third centuries would offer the
following representations.
The man in Adam.
Jerusalem is Paradise.
Jericho is the world.
The priest is the law.
The Levite represents the prophets.
The beast or donkey is the Lord’s incarnate body.
The Inn which accepts all—whosoever will may come—is the
church.
The Innkeeper is the head of the church.
The Samaritan is Christ and the message to the Innkeeper
that he will settle accounts upon his return reminds us of the second coming of
Christ.
Augustine and others might parallel this traditional
allegorical interpretation to some degree.
They might add that the robbers were the Devil and his angels.
John Newton, who would write Amazing Grace and lived in the 18th and 19th
centuries, also penned these lines supporting the traditional allegorical
interpretation:
How kind the good Samaritan
To him who fell among the thieves!
Thus Jesus pities fallen man,
And heals the wounds the soul receives.
To him who fell among the thieves!
Thus Jesus pities fallen man,
And heals the wounds the soul receives.
There have been many interpretations of this parable through
the ages, but this morning, I would like to focus on the two very direct
statements that Jesus makes in conjunction with this scripture.
The first comes before the parable when the teacher responds to the question posed by Jesus, how do you interpret the law. The man says love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and love your neighbor as yourself.
Jesus says do this and you will live. The conversation could have stopped
here. Jesus said love God with
everything that you are and everything that you have. Jesus said, truly love God.
We—the generations of believers who followed—are enriched by
the parable that followed the teacher’s question, who is my neighbor. Jesus answered the teacher’s question with a
parable and with a command.
When the teacher revealed that the neighbor was the one who
showed mercy; Jesus said go and do likewise.
The answer to who is my neighbor is to be a neighbor. For all of the interpretation and
representation that this parable may include; the directive words are to love
God and to be a neighbor—to love one another.
We are not to be so much concerned about who to love or where to love or
in what circumstances do we show love.
We are told to go and do likewise—to be mercy, to be love, to be a
neighbor.
It is a wonderful parable that so many have tried to make
more intricate than it need be. Love
God, love each other, and be a neighbor are powerful and direct.
There are so many ways to examine this parable, but the
question to us is what are we going to do in response to this teaching?
How about:
Love God.
Love one another.
Be a neighbor.
Amen!
No comments:
Post a Comment