If you’ve ever asked the question, what does God expect of me when it comes to helping out those in need, look no further than Jesus teaching on the Good Samaritan. The parable challenges our attempts to set limits on what we are required to do and compels us to take action in the moment.
“But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’ “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.” Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.””
Luke 10:29-37
The Setting
The road from Jerusalem to Jericho runs down a steep descent through desolate and treacherous terrain. The distance is about 17 miles and the road descends more than 3000 feet toward the Jordan river just North of the Dead Sea. It is the kind of wild country in which robbers might be safe and well concealed.
The Priest
It happened that a priest walked by with the man still lying there. Since the man was half dead, the priest would not have been able to determine whether he was dead or not without touching him. But if he touched him and the man was dead, or infected, then he would have become ceremonially defiled. Touching a dead person was something the law forbade (Leviticus chapter 21:1). He could be sure of retaining his ceremonial purity only by leaving the man alone. At the end of the day, he was more concerned about maintaining his purity, than he was with the man’s overall well-being. Jesus makes the point that not only did he walk by the man, he went to the other side of the road. Perhaps he was concerned that it was a trap and the robbers would return, perhaps he was just extremely busy and had places to go. Either way, the man had very little concern for his neighbor.
The Levite
The Levite was also a religious person. His duty was maintenance of the temple services and order. He would also be required to maintain strict purity guidelines based off of the law. In order to avoid becoming ceremonially unclean he chose the same route as the priest. He also didn’t merely avoid helping a man in need, but took pains to walk on the other side of the road. Both men, the priest and the Levite, act contrary to love, though not contrary to expectation.
The Samaritan
When Jesus told a parable, he often gave the story a twist. Perhaps, the people were anticipating that he would contrast the behavior of the priest and the Levite with a working class Israelite who performed admirably when faced with a neighbor who was suffering. However, this twist was particularly cutting. The hero turned out to be a Samaritan, the sworn enemy of the Jewish audience he was speaking to.
It was this man, the Samaritan who had mercy on the man left for dead (presumed to be Jewish). He attended to the man’s wounds by applying wine which acted as an antiseptic. He also applied oil which would have been used to help ease the pain. The man was too weak to walk so he put him on his own donkey. He brought him to an Inn where he would be able to rest up and get well. If all of this were not enough, he paid the innkeeper two denarii, which equates to an estimated two months wages. As well, he offered to return and cover any further expenses incurred on the man’s behalf.
This story of Jesus paints a beautiful picture of a man who did more than the minimum. He saw a neighbor suffering and did all he could do to meet his needs. It removes all limits and challenges us to stop making excuses.
The story is particularly powerful because it impresses upon us the need to choose what is the most good. In both cases, the priest and the Levite were faced with the ethical dilemma of do I violate the law by becoming ceremonially unclean, or do I violate the law by walking past my neighbor who is suffering and in need? It’s a very difficult question. In this scenario, both characters choose the path of least resistance. It required much less of them to simply walk by on the other side of the road and so they did. However, Jesus seems to be pointing out that the priority to maintain one’s personal piety and holiness are no match for one’s responsibility to care for neighbors who are in need. He also is pointing out the fundamental flaw in the law. It causes us to continually reduce its demands down to the minimum, rather than motivating us to do the most good.
Which character in the story do you most identify with? Let’s endeavor to be Good Samaritans!