A Lesson about Neighborly Love
Notes
Transcript
Introduction:
Introduction:
The story of the Good Samaritan is, perhaps, one of the most, if not the the most, beloved parables of all the parables that Christ told.
In this parable we have a combination of self-righteousness, compassion, love, and a man brought face to face with his real need of the grace of God.
And yet, when he is face to face with the utter inability to keep the law of God to perfection, to try and justify himself.
Someone may be tempted to say, ‘Well, I thought this parable was about doing good to people?”
But like so many of the parables that were told by Christ, meany have lowered the true meaning behind a wall of sentimentality instead of Biblical truth.
The parable of the Good Samaritan is not just an exhortation to help those in need.
That is far to simplistic to say that was the main point of Christ.
Jesus Christ is saying much more than just about showing kindness to strangers.
What Christ was actually doing was telling a story to inform the listeners how just far away from God they really are.
He is explaining why all our good works and religious merit are never sufficient enough for us to gain favor with God.
He is, with one story, deflating the hopes of the super-fastidious religious people who think that they can merit eternal life by meticulously following the rabbinical system.
These religious people obsessed over the minutiae in God’s law, and then invented ways around all the truly principles and hard parts of Scripture.
The real point of the parable becomes clear when Jesus takes this pedantic religious legalist who is trying to diminish the force of God’s law with a hairsplitting analysis of the word neighbor and brings him face to face with his true condition and need.
This parable, like so many, has some elements that are very familiar and others that are new.
Now, remember things that we have before, the scribes and the Pharisees noting of God’s grace and nothing about compassion.
In this story Jesus adds an element that would have completely this Jewish leader by bringing in a Samaritan which adds intrigue to the story.
Let’s notice first of all:
I. A Hypocritical Probing (vs. 25-28)
I. A Hypocritical Probing (vs. 25-28)
Now, like so many times is the ministry of Christ, He is approached by someone who seems to be asking an honest question.
What Christian would not want a loved one or friend that has never trusted Christ to come to them and ask:
And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
Now, the text says that this man was a lawyer.
Now, this man was really considered a scribe.
And the Scribes were part of the religious establishment in the time of the ministry of Christ.
These men served as textual experts in Jewish Law.
So, Christ knew exactly who he was talking to and where he had to hit him.
However, our text adds a very important dimension to this man’s question that shows the real hear behind the question.
The text says that he came to Christ in order to “tempt” Him.
His question was not in an effort to receive true information, but was in an effort to confront, and argue with Christ.
And to make Him look ridiculous in the eyes of the people.
This whole situation was meant to be a trap for Christ.
And the question seems simply and honest enough, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
Most Jews had been taught bu their rabbis that their lineage, their circumcision, their ceremonies, and their traditions were what qualified them for the eternal kingdom.
Perhaps this man came to Jesus because there was still some nagging doubt about that in his conscience and wanted to confront them one who had been preaching another message to try and soothe that conscience.
Not all questions are asked with pure motives, many times questions are asked by the hypocrite in order to make the one that they are asking to look foolish and thereby soothe their conscience.
But this time, similar with the Rich Young Ruler, He answered a question with a question.
He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
Christ knew that this is where the man put his trust, so he confronted him on the basis of where he knew he trusted, in the law.
“You want eternal life, you trust in the law anyway, so what does the law say?”
And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.
And, of course, in this statement we understand that this lawyer is referring back to the Shema, the daily reading of the Jews from Deut. 6:4-5.
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
However, he also adds at passage from the book of Leviticus.
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
Now, the Ten Commandments are broken down into two sections.
The first section is the first through the fourth commandment and has to do with our relationship to God.
The second section, the fifth through the tenth have to do with our relationship with each other.
So the entire moral content of the law is summarized and comprised in those two simple commandments.
So, the lawyer got the answer exactly right.
All the moral precepts in the Mosaic law come down to these two areas; loving God and loving your neighbor.
So Jesus tell him:
And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.
The answer that you have is right.
You want eternal life?
Obey that law, perfectly.
Now, we understand from the Scripture that it is cleat that by the deeds of the law, no flesh will be justified in His sight.
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Since this is the case, what is Jesus doing here?
Is He contradicting the words of Paul?
Certainly not!
So why did Jesus not preach the gospel rather than the law to this man?
Because Jesus needed to show this religious leader, just like He had to show the rich young ruler, the ugliness of his sin in comparison to the perfection that the law demands.
He knew that he was depending on his lineage, his outward adherence to the law.
Because, you see, salvation can only occur when the person realizes their sinfulness.
And their utter and total lack of ability to obey God’s perfect standard, which is the law.
Same with this man.
“Ok, you are a lawyer, an expert in the law, what does the law say?”
“You should know, being an expert in the law.”
“You’re quotation is correct, you want eternal life, go and obey that perfectly.”
You see, that was the man’s need.
To see himself as a person who had violated God’s law and therefore needs forgiveness and grace.
So, we see a Hypocritical Probing.
II. A Hard Personality (vs. 29)
II. A Hard Personality (vs. 29)
But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?
The word “willing” there is “θελω” and that is the word in the Greek language that speaks about a wish or desire.
So, this man, wishing to justify himself....
Now, there is only one reason why people attempt to justify themselves.
Because they know that they are wrong, but they will not admit it so they attempt to talk their way around it.
As did this man.
He should have, upon being brought face to face with his grave lack of obedience to the law, bowed in repentance and faith before the feet of Christ and begged for forgiveness and received eternal life.
His conscience was absolutely telling him that he could not even fulfill the the most basic commandments of the law.
But instead, he doused the fire of his conscience with the water of self-righteousness pride.
“Well, who is my neighbor?”
You see, he wanted to convince people that he was righteous when he was not.
He wanted to maintain the facade.
And that was and is the whole problem with hypocrites.
And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
So, instead of asking the question that Jesus’ question prompted, he said, “Who is my neighbor?”
Notice how he skipped right over the part about loving God with all his heart, mind, soul, and strength.
Instead, we wants to discuss a more technical point about the identity of his neighbor.
Because the traditional rabbinical and popular interpretation of Leviticus 19:18 is given by Christ in the Gospel of Matthew.
Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
That takes all of the force out of the command.
Because if you are free to hate your enemy, then you are relieved from loving anyone that you decide is an enemy.
And under that interpretation, you have absolutely no moral obligation to love anyone that you do not want to.
But we need not forget the fact that even though this man was steeped in his own self-righteousness and Jesus could have just written him off as out of the kingdom, we see the gentleness by which Jesus speaks to this man.
This parable is not simply a lesson in etiquette or a manual on how to help the less fortunate.
This is a story told to a religious non-believer, a self-righteous man, as an evangelistic effort to bring him to the true sense of his sinfulness and his need for mercy.
III. A Humbling Portrait (vs. 30-35)
III. A Humbling Portrait (vs. 30-35)
And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.
But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
So, as we have said, this story is not meant to teach how to play nice or how to be a better person or how to treat people, it is meant to show the religious hypocrite how every short of fulfilling the law of God, they come.
They are, perhaps, lots of implications that can be drawn from this but we need to make sure that the implications do not hide the meaning that Christ is trying to drive in the hearts of people.
Let’s break this down so that we have a clear understanding.
And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
We first notice that a certain man was traveling down from Jerusalem to Jericho.
So the the assumption can be reasonably raised that this man, because he was traveling from Jerusalem, was a Jew.
Now, the road that goes south from Jerusalem to Jericho is a very dangerous road.
Even though the story is made up by Christ to teach a point, there are elements of the story that are real, and one of those elements is this road.
From Jerusalem to Jericho is about a 400 hundred foot drop in elevation across the 17 miles of winding road.
This road contains barren mountains and very rough terrain.
In some places, a steep, 300 foot precipice, rather than any kind of shoulder, borders the road.
Much of the route is lines with caves and massive boulders, which offer great hideouts for robbers.
And in Christs’ story, the predictable happens.
The man traveling on the road was robbed and particularly brutal.
The did not just rob the man, but they beat him and left him for dead.
They did not just take his cash, but they took everything that he had.
He was a dying man on a desert road.
The reason that this was such a popular road for robbers is because, not only for its structure, the ability to hide and catch people unawares.
But also because people traveling on this road, were many times going to Jerusalem for feasts and other celebrations; passover being another one.
And they might have well been people that were carrying large sums of money and other possessions with them.
But especially during times of the intense heat of the summer and the cold of the winter, travel on that road was meager.
In fact, there were no homes and very few stopping points on that stretch of road.
So, when someone was robbed, there was no guarantee that anyone would find them to help them on time.
Then Christ goes onto mention the third and fourth character of the story.
The first being the “certain man,” the other being, “thieves,” and the third and fourth being the “Priest and the Levite.”
And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
Now, certainly this is a ray of hope in this otherwise dismal story.
A priest, a servant of God, a man who is supposed to be a spiritual man and who should be a paragon of compassion.
This guy represents the best in all of Jerusalem.
A priest would be familiar with the commandment of the OT Scriptures.
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
He would have also been very familiar with another portion of that same chapter.
And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.
But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
When you approach a stranger in your land, you are to treat that stranger as one that is born among you.
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?
He would fully be aware of:
Whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard.
For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.
This priest would have surely been familiar with:
If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again.
If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him.
So, the law stated that if you found even your enemies donkey in a ditch he was obliged to rescue the donkey.
And, of course, the greater duty was to help a man in critical condition.
But this flash of hope was short-lived, as the text says:
And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
The word “other” is the word “ἀντιπαρέρχομαι” and it means “opposite.”
It is an active test verb, meaning that this man deliberately relocated himself on the opposite side of the road.
The priest obviously had no compassion for people that were in dire need.
You know, when this lawyer asked, “who is my neighbor,” that was the wrong question.
What Jesus is showing this man through this parable is that righteous compassion is not narrow.
True righteousness does not seek a definition of the persons that qualified to received help.
The job of the second commandment are not defined by the question of who is our neighbor.
In fact, true genuine love compels us to be neighborly even to strangers and aliens.
And the idea is that we should love our enemies because they are out neighbors as well.
This priest is indicative of anyone who has full knowledge of the Scriptures and a familiarity with the duties of the law, who is expected to help but does not.
But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.
Now, you remember that the priests were from the tribe of Levi in general; however, they were descendents from Aaron in particular.
So, even those this man is introduced to us by Christ as from the tribe of Levi, he was not a priest.
Those from the tribe of Levi, but not a descendent of Aaron would have had a subordinate role in the temple.
Some were assistance to the priests, others were temple police.
But their lives were devoted to religious service, so they were (like the priests) expected to have a good knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Nevertheless, the Levite did the same thing that the priest did.
The same Greek word is used here for “other side” as in the previous verse.
“ἀντιπαρέρχομαι” active mood, deliberate relocation of himself.
However, notice one little difference in the text.
The text says that when the priest “saw him,” he went to the opposite side of the road.
And it says of the Levite that, “he came and looked at him,” meaning that before he relocated himself, he came over to where he was and looked at him and then made the decision to relocate himself to the other side.
Given the indication, that even though both of those men acted in man way that was a violation of the law, the Levite acted in a more selfish way given the fact that he came to the place where the man was laying and noticed up close his turmoil, then removed all compassion from his life over this man.
These men represented the best that the society had to offer.
They represented the the best educated and most highly esteemed religious dignitaries.
But they did not really know God.
They are classic examples of religious hypocrites, observing the ceremonial law, and even devoting their lives to the service of the temple but lacking any real virtue.
The problem is that we are sometimes guilty of that.
Every time we have an attitude of indifference when we approach someone in need, we display the same attitude as the priest and the Levite.
But we also need to understand the relationship between Jews and Samaritans.
As already stated, it is probably a safe assumption to say that the man that traveling was a Jew.
Gentiles rarely traveled on this road, much less Samaritans.
Why would this man, then travel a road that was known to be such a dangerous road?
Jewish travelers going to Galilee took the road from Jerusalem to Jericho precisely so that they would not have to go through Samaria.
People on that road were not headed straight north in the direction of Galilee, but east to Perea, on the other side of the Jordan River.
It was a more dangerous, less direct route, but it avoided Samaria.
The reason being for all of this is because the Jews considered the Samaritans to be ethnically and religiously unclean, and the Samaritans likewise resented their Jewish cousins.
The Samaritans were descendents of Israelites who had intermarried with pagans after the Assyrians forced most of the population of Israel’s Northern Kingdom in to exile in 722 BC (2 Kings 17:6).
Some Israelite stragglers remained or returned to the land after most of their brethren were forced into exile, and these scattered Israelites mixed with and married pagan settlers.
They kept some of the traditions that were rooted in OT doctrine, but they also blended enough pagan beliefs into the mix that Samaritan worship ultimately became something fundamentally different from either Judaism or Paganism.
And, of course, faithful Jews saw Samaritanism as corrupt, unclean, and treasonous to the God of Scripture.
During the time of Ezra, Jews from the Southern Kingdom began to return from the Babylonian captivity.
As they began to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, the Samaritans offered help.
And unable to hide their religious contempt for Samaritan syncretism, the Jews refused.
So, according to Ezra 4:1-5, the Samaritans tried to sabotage the project.
Then a few years later, at the instigation of Sanballat, they also tried to halt the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s wall (Neh. 4:2).
From that era and for centuries the Jews and the Samaritans have remained the bitterest of enemies.
Jewish people saw Samaritans as apostate people who had sold their spiritual birthright.
Like Jeroboam, the Samaritans ultimately built a temple of their own, with counterfeit priests and unlawful sacrifices.
By the Jews reckoning, they were work than rank pagans because of the subtlety with which they had polluted their religion.
Although the Samaritan temple was destroyed 130 years before Christ by John Hercanus, a Jewish King in the Hasmonean (Maccabean) dynasty, the Samaritans insisted that proper worship was to take place on Mount Gerizim; although the Temple was never rebuilt.
That is what the Samaritan woman was speaking in John 4:20.
So, there was no love lose between the Jews and the Samaritans.
But it is interesting to note how this Samaritan man reacted.
But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
“He saw him.”
This is the same Greek word for “saw” as in the verses about the priests “saw” and the Levite “saw.”
But notice the difference.
The priest “saw” and then went to the opposite side of the road.
Meaning that we must have seen him from a distance then just ignored him.
The Levite “saw him and came over to where was.”
“I cannot get involved, what if the robbers are still around and they jump me next?”
But this man “saw” in the exact why that those other two “saw,” had the same information.
But the Scriptures say:
But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
He had “compassion on him.”
And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
Irregardless of the potential for threat of being robbed and beaten, this man’s compassion was greater than anything else.
This man, a heretic and outcast, was moved with compassion.
Something in his heart went out to this man; a sense of sadness, grief, and tenderhearted empathy.
The Scriptures said that “he poured in oil and wine...”
Both of these would sanitize the wound.
Olive oil was the chief emollient used in the medicine at the time, and was effective for bringing quick relief from the stinging pain of abrasions and bleeding wounds.
Where did the wine and oil come from?
Travelers would often carry oil for cooking and wine for drinking (the water along that trail was not safe).
The Samaritan was using his own provisions.
And the expression that is used seems to indicate that he was not stingy in the application of oil and wine.
Jesus is purposely stressing the lavishness of the Samaritan’s generosity.
Then the text says, “he set him on his animal.”
He walked while the Jewish man rode.
This is what is called extra ordinary sacrifice for someone that he did not even know.
And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
Then he brought him to an Inn to take care of him.
And verse 35 says, “On the morrow…,” so the Samarian stayed with this injured man over night to care for him.
And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
Two Denarii constituted two full days’ wage, and from what we know of the rates at the time, that was enough for two months’ room and board in a wayside inn like that.
This is, again, a remarkable illustration of charity that was shown by this Samaritan man; and illustrates for us the answer to the lawyers question, “who is my neighbor?”
But as we have said before, the point is to show this man and us that all people, friend or enemy, are our neighbors and are deserving of the same gracious charity.
Now that is a tall order, but that is exactly what Christ is trying to illustrate.
And the Samaritan in the story of Christ gave up his clothes, his supplies, his time, a night’s sleep, and a significant sum of cash in order to help this man.
The love that this man displayed was so full that when someone came across his path with a desperate need he was able to meet, he did everything that he could possibly do.
This Samaritan never stopped to ask the same question that the lawyer asked, “who is my neighbor?”
The answer is anyone in need.
And point is that you are so far away from what God truly expects in the law, that you do not even know it.
You are so caught up in your self-righteous religion that never set aside everything to help a total stranger in a desperate situation.
You have never done that to someone that was your enemy.
And that is the point that Jesus is making; you are so far away from God you are so far away from obedience to the law that your “self-righteousness” needs to be unmasked because you have bot obeyed the commandments of the Lord.
The only person that this lawyer had sone everything for was himself.
Our Lord told the parable of the Good Samaritan in order to show what an impossibly high standard the law sets for us, because we will never do for others the way that we should and so we are constant law breakers.
If we did this all the time, then the generosity that the Good Samaritan showed would not seem to be so remarkable.
Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
With the lesson on the parable still hanging in the air, the lawyer said:
And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.
There is the lesson, go and do.
“Go” and “do” are both present tense verbs, “go and continually do in the same way.”
“To my enemy,” the lawyer must have thought to himself.
Because the law demands perfect obedience all the time and that was the point that Christ was trying to tell this lawyer.
You believe that you are fulfilling the law by doing this to your friends, but the law demands to your neighbors, friend of foe.
And you cannot do that, the demand is to high, you cannot obey the standard of the law and you need grace.
Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.
What this lawyer seemed to forget and we need to be reminded is that if we want to live, then we must keep all of the statues of the Lord.
Therefore, we are hopeless under the law.
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
Had this lawyer only confessed his own guilt and admitted his inability to do what the law demands, Jesus would have been ready to offer him an eternity of mercy, grace, forgiveness, and true love.
Too many people read the parable of the Good Samaritan and see it as a command for humanitarianism, but if that is the only response that people have then that is the worst possible response they could have.
The parable is meant to constrain is to confess out sinful weakness (that is revealed in our lack of compassionate, sacrificial love) and see grace and mercy by turning in repentance to Jesus Christ, the only that truly fulfilled the whole law.
Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
That must be people’s response to this parable.