The Parable of the Good Samaritan

The Parable of the Good Samaritan

The Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) differs from most other parables because it is so simple, yet so concrete that a child can understand its basic point. However, it is also an insightful and memorable exposition of practical moral principles. Many religious and secular people understand that the parable shows its effectiveness and its simplicity and depth. Unlike other parables, each figure in the story does not necessarily represent a spiritual equivalent. The whole narrative describes working compassion as contrasted to selfishness, of hate compared with love.

The parable of the Good Samaritan told by Jesus, struck a certain cord with me for a number of reasons. First of all, the parable can only be found in the Gospel of Luke and secondly, Luke's account on the life of Jesus is guaranteed to be trustworthy as well as orderly.

"And so your Excellency, because I have carefully studied all of these matters from their beginnings, I thought it would be good to write an orderly account for you." (Luke 1:4)

This passage reveals to its readers, the innermost problems of ethics and the point of ethical obligation. In this text it is the scholars, the wise and most learned that are exposed for what they are or are not. I found it interesting that the Gospel of Luke began differently than the other three Gospels. I wondered why Luke thought that his account of Jesus' life was more "orderly" than the other gospels in the New Testament. It raised a question of what Luke's purpose was in writing an account of the Gospel in dedication to Theophilus.

According to the Studying Jesus-Learning Christ, by Tom Yoder Neufeld, Luke already knew that there were many others that set themselves the task of writing presentations of what Jesus did, said, experienced, and why it mattered. Also we are aware of the Gospels of Thomas and Peter proving that we could not fathom how many gospels were actually written in that time where Luke made reference to "Eyewitnesses" and to servants of the Word.

I agree with Neufeld, when he states, that Luke's "orderly attempt" was not an attempt to get specific stories of the other evangelists correct, but rather, it was an attempt to persuade Theophilus of the truth from a theological or evangelistic point of view. Many biblical interpreters contend that Theophilus was perhaps a sympathetic Roman ruler, but still of pagan faith, whom Luke was attempting to influence the truths of the Gospel. Theophilus in Luke's account described, as "most excellent" was obviously a man who was of a higher status than Luke. It was an appropriate way to address government officials. (The Interpreters Bible p.120).

The geographical location of this story is significant because the road from Jerusalem to Jericho was legendary, treacherous and dangerous. The given name to this area was "Adummim" (Ah-doo-miym), "The Pass of Blood"(Calvary Chapel Luke 10:1-37). This mountainous area was an inhospitable gorge that left great opportunities for thieves to ambush travelers. In this parable a man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho was robbed, stripped, wounded and left for dead. And by chance, a Priest passed by the wounded man and went to the other side of the road, paying no attention to him.

Also a Levite passed by, looked at the wounded man and continued to walk on the other side of the road. But a Samaritan, on his journey, came to where the wounded man was and his heart filled with compassion. He went to the wounded man, bound his cuts and poured oil and wine on them. He even set him on his own animal, took him to an inn and made