The Good Samaritan -- the merciful one

[goodreport]

Luke 10:33-37

v 36 ...which of these three was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves?
v 37 ...he that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus Go and do thou likewise

====================================

from Ray Prinzing Daily Overcoming Devotional

BECOMING MERCIFUL ONES

Ps 18:25
With the merciful Thou wilt shew Thyself merciful.

One of the precious inworkings of His grace in the lives of those, whom He separates unto Himself, is that they are becoming His merciful ones.  Seems that many have walked with God for years without learning what it means to "have mercy", to become a vessel of mercy through whom His mercy is revealed.  There has been far too much fight in us; a demand for justice according to what we think is justice.

Jonah received the word of the Lord -- it is a marvelous thing to receive "the Word of the Lord", but that doesn't make us a merciful one.  It was because Jonah rebelled against mercy, that he first fled unot "Tarshish: for I knew that Thou are a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness," (Jonah 4:2).  So God had to discipline him in the belly of a great fish, until somewhat subdued he was willing to speak the "Word" which the Lord had given unto him.  Then God had to give him another forceful object lesson with a gourd to teach him to have mercy.  How hard are the lessons we need to teach us also to be merciful.  But in due time we shall be perfected in mercy, for He has a work of mercy to be performed through His people.

"Be ye merciful, as your Father also is merciful.  Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven." (Luke 6:36-37)  Note the word "forgive", same Greek root used elsewhere as "redemption", TO LOOSE AWAY.  We are groaning within ourselves for the fulness of our redemption, that we might be loosed from the very last vestige of this bondage of vanity.  But what sayest thou to this statement of our Lord, according as thou forgivest another (loose them from their offences toward you), so shall thou be forgiven (loosed from all that presently holds you captive)?

The more we learn to be merciful unto others, the more we also shall be able to comprehend His mercy for us.  "For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward them that fear Him", (Ps 103:11)

[Deena]

Thank you for sharing this and the one about letting go. The encouragement has blessed me.

[Pierac]

I was doing a study on Parables many years ago...  Let me share a few comments on this one.


Luk 10:25  And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 26  And He said to him, "What is written in the Law? How
does it read to you?" 27  And he answered, "YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR
STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." 28  And He said to him, "You have answered correctly; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE."
29  But wishing to justify himself, he said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" 30  Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell
among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. 31  "And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he
passed by on the other side. 32  "Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33  "But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came
upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, 34  and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and
brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35  "On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you
spend, when I return I will repay you.' 36  "Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands?" 37  And he said, "The one
who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."


The message of this parable reaches the audience on different levels.  The parable of the Good Samaritan teaches a clear message on the level of a child.  But does it challenge the minds of the learned?  Because Christian scholars often misunderstand the Jewish background to the teaching of Jesus, they frequently miss the deeper level of meaning in the story of the Good Samaritan. 

In the Lukan context of the parable of the Good Samaritan, the Torah scholar approach Jesus and ask him a question, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"  Jesus answered him by asking another question, "What is written in the Torah?  How do you read?"  Because of the way Jesus presented his questions, the Torah scholar could arrive at the proper approach, "love the Lord your God" and "your neighbor as yourself."

The dialectic discussion between Jesus and the scholar was not characterized by hostility or confrontation, as many New Testament scholars have assumed.  The question is a genuine inquiry.  Jewish learning involved asking questions and answering questions with more questions.  In regard to the conclusion of the parable of the Good Samaritan.  When Jesus asked him who was the neighbor to the man in need, the Torah scholar answered correctly, "The one who showed mercy."  He concluded that even one's enemy, could be a neighbor.  The astonishing conclusion of the parable demonstrates that the Torah scholar was sincere, because he arrived at the proper answer after hearing the parable.

The colorful cast members of the mini-drama provided insight into the plot of the story.  A man is stripped and left half dead.  With out identifying clothes, one cannot recognize to which cultural community he belongs.  Is he a Pharisee?  Is he a priest?  Is he Roman?  Jesus does not tell listeners.  He is simply a dying man in urgent need.

The inner structure of the parable is seen in the other three characters.  The Lukan context of the parable would indicate that the Torah scholar asking Jesus questions was one who accepted the oral law, perhaps a Pharisee.  In contrast, the first two characters who passed by the injured man do not embrace the oral tradition.  The priest and the Levite were probably Sadducees, who would have not accepted the validity of the Oral Torah.  They would, however, follow the written law with literal exactitude.  Here one begins to appreciate the artistry in the parable.

The three key actors, the Priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan, have both similarities and distinctions within the diverse religious cultures of the first century C.E. The original audience of the parable would have been keenly aware of these distinctions.

The religious men make no effort to help him because of their understanding of biblical law.  The leading characters of the story play significant roles in the structure of the parable's plot. The Priest and the Levite continue the actions of the robbers; the robbers abandoned him to die and they passed by in a like manner.  The Samaritan, however, reverses the actions of the thieves and makes every effort to restore the man whose life was at risk.

The tremendous importance given to the oral interpretation of the Torah in Pharisaic teachings can hardly be overemphasize.  The Torah was delivered to Moses with its oral commentary and practical application in every aspect of human experience.  The Sadducees rejected the teachings of the oral law.  They were literalists in the sense that they followed only the written law.

The difference between the scholar asking Jesus a question such as "Who is my neighbor?"  And the leading characters in the parable is decisive.  The oral interpretation of the written law, which were so very important to Jesus and the Torah scholar, have little meaning for the Priest and the Levite.

The people listening to the parable are keenly aware that the Sadducees in the priestly service are extremely concerned about their ritual purity.  In the eyes of a Sadducean literalist, the prohibition in the written Torah (Lev 21:1) "And the Lord said to Moses, 'speak to the Priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them that none of them shall defile himself for the dead among his people'" superseded all humanitarian concerns.

The met mitzvah is a law concerning a dead person who has no one to bury him. The oral law require is even a high priest to pollute himself with ritual and purity in order to bury a met mitzvah. The written law states clearly, "The priest... shall not go into any dead body, nor defile himself, even for his father or for his mother" (Lev 21:11).  The priest in the Levite acted properly according to the literal meaning of the Torah.  In the Oral Law, however, as preserved in the later codification of the Mishnah, the early tradition presents a different approach for the met mitzvah.

In fact, even in pagan thought it was an acceptable ethic of civilized conduct to provide burial for an abandon corpse.  However, the more important issue was saving a life.
In the parable, Jesus criticizes a Priest and a Levite for not being willing to risk coming into contact with a corpse.  The point seems to be that they did not know whether or not the man by the side of the road was dead, when they were unwilling to risk incurring corpse-impurity simply on the chance that they might have been able to help.

The oral law teaches proper ethical conduct whether the man was dead or still alive. The priest in the Levite could ignore the teachings of the oral law in good conscience because of the literal approach to the Pentateuch.

In the Jewish oral tradition, the principal of saving life at all cost gained unsurpassed and uncompromised priority.  All written laws of the Torah must be violated to preserve life.  Clearly a dying man's life is more important than ritual purity.  The priest in the Levite treated the dying man as if he were already dead.  They did not except the oral tradition concerning the preservation of life at all cost, and they feared that their ritual impurity was at risk.

Clearly, when Jesus referred to the Samaritan in a positive manner, it was an ingenious shock element in the parable. Even a Samaritan cared more for human life than the Priest or the Levite.  The guardians of the Temple neglected basic human values.

The meaning of "neighbor" must include not only those who are near but even an enemy.  Jesus wanted the Torah scholar to understand the point.  He chose three characters to play leading roles in the parable.  He asked the scholar, "Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fail among the robbers?"

He did not respond by saying "the Samaritan" instead he answered with profound wisdom, "The one who the showed mercy." The Torah scholar did not categorize the Samaritan according to his cultural and religious community.  He saw him for what he did.  He realized from the story of Jesus that every human being, whether friend or enemy, is of inestimable value and must be esteemed according to the biblical commandment "you shall love your neighbor as yourself."  Jesus made his point clear enough for the Torah scholar; one should interpret the verse in the broadest sense: "you shall love even your enemy as yourself."

Just an old study that I thought was cool...
Paul

[goodreport]

I was doing a study on Parables many years ago…  Let me share a few comments on this one.


Luk 10:25  And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 26  And He said to him, "What is written in the Law? How
does it read to you?" 27  And he answered, "YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR
STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." 28  And He said to him, "You have answered correctly; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE."
29  But wishing to justify himself, he said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" 30  Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell
among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. 31  "And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he
passed by on the other side. 32  "Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33  "But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came
upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, 34  and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and
brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35  "On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you
spend, when I return I will repay you.' 36  "Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands?" 37  And he said, "The one
who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."


The message of this parable reaches the audience on different levels.  The parable of the Good Samaritan teaches a clear message on the level of a child.  But does it challenge the minds of the learned?  Because Christian scholars often misunderstand the Jewish background to the teaching of Jesus, they frequently miss the deeper level of meaning in the story of the Good Samaritan. 

In the Lukan context of the parable of the Good Samaritan, the Torah scholar approach Jesus and ask him a question, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"  Jesus answered him by asking another question, "What is written in the Torah?  How do you read?"  Because of the way Jesus presented his questions, the Torah scholar could arrive at the proper approach, "love the Lord your God" and "your neighbor as yourself."

The dialectic discussion between Jesus and the scholar was not characterized by hostility or confrontation, as many New Testament scholars have assumed.  The question is a genuine inquiry.  Jewish learning involved asking questions and answering questions with more questions.  In regard to the conclusion of the parable of the Good Samaritan.  When Jesus asked him who was the neighbor to the man in need, the Torah scholar answered correctly, "The one who showed mercy."  He concluded that even one's enemy, could be a neighbor.  The astonishing conclusion of the parable demonstrates that the Torah scholar was sincere, because he arrived at the proper answer after hearing the parable.

The colorful cast members of the mini-drama provided insight into the plot of the story.  A man is stripped and left half dead.  With out identifying clothes, one cannot recognize to which cultural community he belongs.  Is he a Pharisee?  Is he a priest?  Is he Roman?  Jesus does not tell listeners.  He is simply a dying man in urgent need.

The inner structure of the parable is seen in the other three characters.  The Lukan context of the parable would indicate that the Torah scholar asking Jesus questions was one who accepted the oral law, perhaps a Pharisee.  In contrast, the first two characters who passed by the injured man do not embrace the oral tradition.  The priest and the Levite were probably Sadducees, who would have not accepted the validity of the Oral Torah.  They would, however, follow the written law with literal exactitude.  Here one begins to appreciate the artistry in the parable.

The three key actors, the Priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan, have both similarities and distinctions within the diverse religious cultures of the first century C.E. The original audience of the parable would have been keenly aware of these distinctions.

The religious men make no effort to help him because of their understanding of biblical law.  The leading characters of the story play significant roles in the structure of the parable's plot. The Priest and the Levite continue the actions of the robbers; the robbers abandoned him to die and they passed by in a like manner.  The Samaritan, however, reverses the actions of the thieves and makes every effort to restore the man whose life was at risk.

The tremendous importance given to the oral interpretation of the Torah in Pharisaic teachings can hardly be overemphasize.  The Torah was delivered to Moses with its oral commentary and practical application in every aspect of human experience.  The Sadducees rejected the teachings of the oral law.  They were literalists in the sense that they followed only the written law.

The difference between the scholar asking Jesus a question such as "Who is my neighbor?"  And the leading characters in the parable is decisive.  The oral interpretation of the written law, which were so very important to Jesus and the Torah scholar, have little meaning for the Priest and the Levite.

The people listening to the parable are keenly aware that the Sadducees in the priestly service are extremely concerned about their ritual purity.  In the eyes of a Sadducean literalist, the prohibition in the written Torah (Lev 21:1) "And the Lord said to Moses, 'speak to the Priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them that none of them shall defile himself for the dead among his people'" superseded all humanitarian concerns.

The met mitzvah is a law concerning a dead person who has no one to bury him. The oral law require is even a high priest to pollute himself with ritual and purity in order to bury a met mitzvah. The written law states clearly, "The priest… shall not go into any dead body, nor defile himself, even for his father or for his mother" (Lev 21:11).  The priest in the Levite acted properly according to the literal meaning of the Torah.  In the Oral Law, however, as preserved in the later codification of the Mishnah, the early tradition presents a different approach for the met mitzvah.

In fact, even in pagan thought it was an acceptable ethic of civilized conduct to provide burial for an abandon corpse.  However, the more important issue was saving a life.
In the parable, Jesus criticizes a Priest and a Levite for not being willing to risk coming into contact with a corpse.  The point seems to be that they did not know whether or not the man by the side of the road was dead, when they were unwilling to risk incurring corpse-impurity simply on the chance that they might have been able to help.

The oral law teaches proper ethical conduct whether the man was dead or still alive. The priest in the Levite could ignore the teachings of the oral law in good conscience because of the literal approach to the Pentateuch.

In the Jewish oral tradition, the principal of saving life at all cost gained unsurpassed and uncompromised priority.  All written laws of the Torah must be violated to preserve life.  Clearly a dying man's life is more important than ritual purity.  The priest in the Levite treated the dying man as if he were already dead.  They did not except the oral tradition concerning the preservation of life at all cost, and they feared that their ritual impurity was at risk.

Clearly, when Jesus referred to the Samaritan in a positive manner, it was an ingenious shock element in the parable. Even a Samaritan cared more for human life than the Priest or the Levite.  The guardians of the Temple neglected basic human values.

The meaning of "neighbor" must include not only those who are near but even an enemy.  Jesus wanted the Torah scholar to understand the point.  He chose three characters to play leading roles in the parable.  He asked the scholar, "Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fail among the robbers?"

He did not respond by saying "the Samaritan" instead he answered with profound wisdom, "The one who the showed mercy." The Torah scholar did not categorize the Samaritan according to his cultural and religious community.  He saw him for what he did.  He realized from the story of Jesus that every human being, whether friend or enemy, is of inestimable value and must be esteemed according to the biblical commandment "you shall love your neighbor as yourself."  Jesus made his point clear enough for the Torah scholar; one should interpret the verse in the broadest sense: "you shall love even your enemy as yourself."

Just an old study that I thought was cool...
Paul

Paul, thanks for sharing your "cool old study" -- it suits my current (new) approach to studying the Word of Truth (2 Tim 2:16)            word of truth (Col 1:5; Eph i:13; 2 Cor 6:7; 1 Thess 2:13)

New approach under three headings:

1.  The truth: cultural, as perceived through five senses   BODY
2.  The whole truth: religious, as understood by the human mind   SOUL
3.  Nothing but the TRUTH: as received from the Spirit of God     SPIRIT

1 Cor 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him neither can he know [them] because they are spiritually discerned.

It seems to me that Ray Prinzing's devotional "Becoming Merciful Ones" opens up the spiritual truth taught by this parable  (mercy is an attribute of love (God is love)... many ways to love neighbor, showing mercy is one of them

[anna274]

Luke 10:33-37

v 36 ...which of these three was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves?
v 37 ...he that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus Go and do thou likewise

====================================

from Ray Prinzing Daily Overcoming Devotional

BECOMING MERCIFUL ONES

Ps 18:25
With the merciful Thou wilt shew Thyself merciful.

One of the precious inworkings of His grace in the lives of those, whom He separates unto Himself, is that they are becoming His merciful ones.  Seems that many have walked with God for years without learning what it means to "have mercy", to become a vessel of mercy through whom His mercy is revealed.  There has been far too much fight in us; a demand for justice according to what we think is justice.

Jonah received the word of the Lord -- it is a marvelous thing to receive "the Word of the Lord", but that doesn't make us a merciful one.  It was because Jonah rebelled against mercy, that he first fled unot "Tarshish: for I knew that Thou are a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness," (Jonah 4:2).  So God had to discipline him in the belly of a great fish, until somewhat subdued he was willing to speak the "Word" which the Lord had given unto him.  Then God had to give him another forceful object lesson with a gourd to teach him to have mercy.  How hard are the lessons we need to teach us also to be merciful.  But in due time we shall be perfected in mercy, for He has a work of mercy to be performed through His people.

"Be ye merciful, as your Father also is merciful.  Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven." (Luke 6:36-37)  Note the word "forgive", same Greek root used elsewhere as "redemption", TO LOOSE AWAY.  We are groaning within ourselves for the fulness of our redemption, that we might be loosed from the very last vestige of this bondage of vanity.  But what sayest thou to this statement of our Lord, according as thou forgivest another (loose them from their offences toward you), so shall thou be forgiven (loosed from all that presently holds you captive)?

The more we learn to be merciful unto others, the more we also shall be able to comprehend His mercy for us.  "For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward them that fear Him", (Ps 103:11)