APPLICATION ARTICLE | Jeremy Woodman | Kingston, Ontario
The parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) is one of Jesus’s best-known parables. Like the story of David and Goliath the general outline is known even amongst worldly people. The phrase ‘the good Samaritan’ has entered the popular lexicon to describe any altruistic deed one stranger performs for another, like helping someone whose car has broken down. While this surface interpretation is true it also misses the deeper points Jesus is making and in this parable what Jesus did not tell us is instructive as well.
Before examining the parable it is worthwhile to look at the context. Why did Jesus give this parable? It is in response to a question from a lawyer, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life” (Luke 10:25)? Speculating on a person’s motive is generally unwise but in this instance the Spirit reveals to us that the lawyer wished to test him (v 25). Jesus returns the question to him and the lawyer responds by quoting Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18, which commands man to fully love God and love his neighbour as himself. This answer, which interestingly enough is also the answer Jesus gave when questioned about which was the greatest commandment, is accepted by Jesus. The lawyer asks a follow-up question, “and who is my neighbour?” (v 29). The parable is the answer to that question. Again we are told the motive; he wished to “justify himself” (v 29), that is to say, he wished to be proved correct on some point. Consider the implications. If one can define neighbour to exclude certain people then one can eliminate the obligation to love that category of people. It is an attempt to limit the scope of the command of God, to find a loophole in the law of God, and perhaps to justify past sinful behaviour on the lawyer’s part. How Jesus answers this question then has serious implications.
What follows is the parable itself and the following analysis assumes the reader has read the text. As mentioned in the introduction, the focus will be on the details we are not told. For example, we are not told anything about the robber’s victim. Was he a good man? Was he an evil man? We don’t know. Nor does the Samaritan make that a factor in his decision to help him. We see no attempt on the Samaritan’s part to get out of helping this man by suggesting he deserved his fate. What we do know is that the robbed man, absent intervention, would die. He desperately needed a saviour. The spiritual parallels to our own circumstances are clear. Paul writes to the Romans that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Roman 3:23) and “the wages of sin are death” (Romans 6:23). This means that every person living that is old enough to understand that difference between right and wrong and chooses the wrong is in the same condition, spiritually, as the robbed man – dead, absent intervention. That intervention came from Jesus, “for when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly” (Romans 5:6).
The Samaritan assisted the man at cost to himself, without expectation of reciprocation. First he took on a personal risk to his safety. Then, as now, it is possible that a person fakes distress to lure in people. That was not the case here but the Samaritan did not know that. He assumed the risk and helped nonetheless. He used his own supplies, he searched for accommodations, he paid for the robbed man’s recovery at an inn, and bore the responsibility for any additional expenses (v 34-36). The man’s care was not cheap, costing the Samaritan two denarii, or the equivalent of two day’s wages. He did not transfer the financial responsibility to the robbed man. Spiritually, Jesus not only paid with his physical life but gave up the glory of heaven to serve God and man (Philippians 2:5-11), “while we were sinners” (Romans 5:7) and “when we were enemies” (Romans 5:10) of God! While the point of this sacrifice is to demonstrate love and motivate man to repentance, in contrast to the earned wages of death, the grace and mercy of God are described as “the free gift of God (which) is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23). At the first sin God could have chosen to send us to hell and He would be justified in doing so, however, out of love He chose to have compassion on us. The good Samaritan is simply a lesser example of the compassion that Christ Jesus had on us, and all that would respond to the gospel message.
We are also never told why the priest and the Levite chose not to help. Were they afraid for their own safety? Presumably, given the road was from Jericho, a Levitical city, to Jerusalem, both may have been bound for their temple service rotation. Were they concerned that they would be late to report for duty if they stopped to help the robbed man? Did they believe the robbed man was evil and somehow deserving of his fate? We are not told their motive, but it is clear in praising the Samaritan’s compassion, that Jesus does not accept their excuse. In fact, Jesus subverts expectations here. The Jews viewed the Samaritans with even more contempt than the Gentiles, considering them apostates and enemies. The parable could have made its point by having a Samaritan the victim, assisted by either the priest of the Levite. However, in doing so a major lesson would have been lost. In showing that a sworn enemy understands who his neighbour is and exercises compassion, Jesus goes beyond answering the lawyer’s question by admonishing him to do better. It is reminiscent of His praise of the centurion before the people of Capernaum, “I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel!” (Matthew 8:10).
At the conclusion of the parable Jesus asks the lawyer, “so which of these three do you think was neighbour to him who fell among the thieves?” (v 36) and the lawyer correctly answers, “he who showed mercy on him” (v 37). Whether he was pleased with the answer we are not told but he understood the lesson, the term neighbour is applicable to all mankind and not limited in its scope. What lesson can we take from this teaching? Physically, we have an obligation to assist those in need, even when they have been hostile to us, “if your enemy is hungry feed him, if he is thirsty give him a drink” (Proverbs 25:21). Spiritually, each day we encounter people who have been overcome by something much worse than robbers, they have been overtaken by sin and are in need of a Saviour. Friends, will we not have compassion on them, teaching them the gospel, and leading them to the One who can save them, like someone had compassion on us when we were in need?
______________________________
October 2025 | GROW magazine
Download PDF of the October 2025 issue
