When I listen to people expound on
the Good Samaritan, I notice that they will usually miss two important things:
the beginning and the ending. (We’re in Luke chapter 10 here.)
An “expert in the law” asks an
important question at the beginning, before the “Who is my neighbor,” one. He
asks, “What must I do to inherit eternal life.”
This question, we are told, is to
“test” Jesus.
Test accepted, smiles Jesus.
This question, remember, is before
the question that everyone thinks about when discussing this story.
The “eternal life” statement
everyone at least makes a passing reference to, but the word no one seems to
pick up on is “inherit.”
“What must I do to INHERIT eternal
life?”
Lawyers do understand something
about inheriting and what an inheritance is.
To inherit something legally means
certain conditions must be meant.
For instance, it requires a death.
A death in the family. An inheritance needs to be from one specific family
member to another one or several other families or somehow related. A very
specific condition really.
So, at least to me, it is a curious
word to use in that context. Of course, the connotation is that eternal life is
always a positive thing. Although, since the man asking the question is a
lawyer, he would also know that you can be “disinherited” from the person who
left the inheritance. He or she can take you out of the will.
These are absolutes. Laws if you
will. So, eternal life has some absolutes and the “family of God” is involved.
You can be disinherited. Or never really identified with the family of God.
The questioning lawyer is a smart
chap to me. Jesus asks him for his interpretation of the law of Moses. He gets
it right; and Jesus appears to be impressed.
So, what does it mean that the
lawyer wanted to “justify his actions?” Well, the law exposes our downfalls;
our weaknesses. We can say we love God with all our heart, souls and might, but
in reality, who actually does that? We can say that the basis of our existence
is to love our neighbor, but you haven’t met my neighbor (rhetorical
answer).
In reality, my actual neighbor is
someone I could never “love,” even as I love myself, but we do get along. I
don’t really mind him. Mostly because I can ignore him for the most part. There
are lots of things about myself and other people that I ignore just to survive.
Now the person that gets robbed on
his way from Jerusalem to Jericho, is not given any particular designation:
i.e., he’s not a Jewish person or a anything like that. Apparently, he represents
everyone. We all have hard times.
He gets beat up pretty good. Unable
to rescue himself from the difficult situation. A humbling experience really,
if you’ve ever been in a place where you need another’s help just to get out of
some initial, difficult problems.
Again, Jesus is describing “who is
my neighbor?”
The story goes on:
Along comes a priest. Someone
steeped in the rules. A man of scholarly ambition. Looked up to and admired,
well, at least for his position. Especially admired by himself. Worships
himself let’s say.
Passes on by. We are not really
told why.
Next comes a Levite. A true “rabbi”
if you will. Loves to hear that name applied to him in the town square. Thinks
very highly of himself. So highly in fact, that well, when it comes to someone
is real trouble, well, he is anything but a neighbor. He has his own definition
of who does and doesn’t need help; and this person in front of him definitely
falls outside that range. But he is well versed in the law; so the guy is great
at justifying his actions. And well, let’s go so far as to say, he is just
being true to himself.
And then we have our hero: the
Samaritan. Text doesn’t even say good really, because people love to add their
own monikers and slants to the stories in the bible. Not entirely a bad thing
to do that, unless it is completely off base, which, in this case, well, good
is not something the Jewish populace thought Samaritans were.
No, the Samaritans were the enemy.
Definitely from the wrong side of the tracks. Not good at all. They worshipped
the wrong things; had their own temple, so on and so forth.
So, one thing that can be done with
stories, is that you can abstract what this would mean for the reader or the
audience.
The audience is supposed to think
of a cult or people of faith that they don't particularly believe are getting much right, either politically or religiously.
So the “good” Samaritan is not
really good in the eyes of Jesus’ audience. But he is good in getting past his
own prejudices and not seeing another human being as beneath him or his way of
thinking. He is good at seeing another human being who is having real problems,
no matter their societal affiliation, religious persuasion or political party.
Perhaps you are or know someone who
has trouble looking past say their own political prejudices.
As for myself, I try to stay on
what is true. So when I come upon this type of situation, I will see it for
what it is. Now, it could be someone whose beliefs or demographic or political
persuasion is not my own, but what I need to be seeing is a hurting person.
That is paramount to being a good neighbor.
But that is commentary, not
sticking with the story. So, on with the story:
The importance is not in exactly
who the robbed man is or what his labels are. In fact, (truth) that is the
point of the story. The contrast is obvious: the Samaritan actually does help.
Not just think he’s helping or has a romanticized view of interceding in
people’s lives, but rolls up his sleeves, and gets in the mess. He has actual
compassion; goes over to the victim and lends an actual hand. Takes him to an
inn, pays the fare. Is going to come back when he is better, so on and so
forth.
The story appears to have two main
points: the first being is to step outside of what you think “religion” is and
actually does. The lawyer was trying to justify himself because he thought the
law, or actions, is what helps people. Jesus is putting that notion to rest.
Even though the Samaritan’s actions are important, it’s the fact that he goes
beyond “what” religion is purported to do. The Samaritan is breaking all his
own the rules, as it were. He gets involved. He forms a relationship with the
man who was robbed. He goes above and beyond the call of duty. Messes are messy; no one likes them. True help is difficult. It will take away from what a person thinks is important and place it on someone who truly needs the aid. Could be rich; or poor. What does economics have to do with it?
Try to understand, this isn’t
pleasant or fun or something anyone looks forward to. It is messy, hard work
to, in truth, help people. Religion fails miserably at it. A works-based faith
is the farthest thing from actual help that there is; that appears to be is
what the parable is telling us.
The last thing is the ending. Jesus
asks who is the man who was robbed actual neighbor?
The lawyer says: “The one who
showed him mercy.”
What quality of mercy is the lawyer
referring to?
The point Jesus, and the lawyer is
making, is your heart for looking beyond your own way of thinking so that when
true problems arise, a Christian can roll up his sleeves and get into the mess?
A true, neighbor, according to the
lawyer, knows true mercy and demonstrates it in reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment