Who Is My Neighbour? A Religion of Kindness - Luke 10:25–37
In our passage today, a religious lawyer stands up to test Jesus: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?”
It’s a big question, not just about what happens when we die, but as we see in Jesus response it is about how we live in the here and now. The Greek word often translated as eternal (aiōnios) doesn’t just mean “unending.” It means ‘of the age’, or ‘belonging to the divine realm’, the realm of the Eternal. So when the lawyer asks about “eternal life,” Jesus hears a deeper question:
“How do I live in harmony with the Eternal One? How do I live a life that reflects the Divine reality?”
Jesus answers, as he so often does, with a question of his own. He draws the man back to Torah (the Law): “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” And the man responds with the Shema, the very heartbeat of Jewish faith: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind, your neighbour as yourself.”
“You have answered correctly,” says Jesus. “Do this, and you will live.” In other words, you will live now, fully, divinely, in harmony with the life of The Eternal.
But, as many of us might be inclined to do, the lawyer seeks to narrow the field: “And who is my neighbour?” he asks.
That’s when Jesus tells a story, a story that shatters ethnic boundaries, a story that cuts to the heart of the Jewish-Samaritan divide. A story that speaks profoundly to our fractured world today. To fully feel the weight of this parable, we need to understand the history between Jews and Samaritans.
The Samaritans were descendants of Israelites left behind after the Assyrian conquest of the northern kingdom of Israel in the 8th century BC. These Northern Israelites had overtime intermarried with foreigners brought into the land by the Assyrians. While still maintaining their Hebrew religious heritage, over time, their religion developed a little differently. They had their own slightly different version of the Torah or Scriptures, they revered Mount Gerizim instead of Jerusalem, and rejected the Jerusalem Temple and priesthood in Judea.
The differences are interesting when looked at more closely...
The Samaritans, like the Jews accepted the first five books of Moses (the Torah) as authoritative: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.
And so interestingly both groups revered and shared the same core scriptures. They shared the same creation stories, the stories of the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob), the story of the Exodus from Egypt, the covenant at Sinai and the same laws of Moses
However, the Samaritan version of the Torah had some notable differences. The key difference included the central place of worship: The Jewish version of the Torah points to Jerusalem as the chosen place of worship (see Deuteronomy 12). The Samaritan version of the Torah points instead to Mount Gerizim in Samaria as the chosen holy place. This was a central theological divide, and is why the Samaritan woman at the well could say to Jesus in John 4:20–22: “Our ancestors worshipped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”
In addition to these shared scriptures Samaritans however rejected the scrolls of the Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel etc…), and also what is known as the Writings (Psalms, Proverbs, Danie...).
The real, fundamental break between Samaritans and Jews came after the Jews returned to Judea and Jerusalem after a 70 year exile in Babylon in 538 BC. When the Jews came back from exile in Babylon, especially under the influence of Ezra and Nehemiah they came back with a policy quite extreme ethnic purity. The books of Ezra and Nehemiah tell of how Jews were forced to divorce and send away their foreign wives along with children born of those wives. One can only imagine the suffering they endured. Some scholars say that the books of Ruth and Jonah were written as a direct challenge to this policy of ethnic purity and exclusiveness – showing God’s care towards foreigners.
It was this policy of ethnic purity from returning Babylonian Jews that led to a decisive break with those who became known as the Samaritans because the Samaritans were regarded as not ethnically pure enough to belong.
And so with this background, to the Jews of Jesus’ day, the Samaritans were religious deviants and ethnic half-breeds despite the fact that they shared some core religious beliefs and Scriptures and a common religious and genetic heritage. Samaritans, in turn, deeply resented being excluded and looked down upon by the Jews, whom they saw as arrogant and dismissive of their own ancient faith and traditions that also went back to Abraham and Moses. The Jewish historian Josephus records that, at one point, some Samaritans defiled the Jerusalem Temple by scattering human bones in the sanctuary, a shocking act in Jewish eyes. This was the kind of tension that existed between the two groups who avoided each others villages and who at times engaged in violent spats between each other.
And so when Jesus says in his parable, “A Samaritan came near, and was moved with compassion” he isn't just telling a nice story about kindness. He's breaking open centuries of division, suspicion and hatred. Imagine saying today in Israel-Palestine:
“A Palestinian child lay bleeding, and it was an Israeli settler or Israeli Soldier who stopped, bound the wounds, and paid for the child’s care…”
Or
“A wounded Israeli soldier was left on the road… and a Palestinian came near, saw him, and was moved with compassion…”
Jesus deliberately chooses the person the lawyer would least expect, or even despise, to be the hero of his story. Why? Why doesn’t Jesus affirm love within his own group? Why does he push the boundary? Why not just love your own? Because Jesus did not look at humanity through the eyes of nationalism or ethnic identity. He saw all people as members of one human family… He saw all people, Jews, Greeks, Samaritans and Romans as all equally children of God. His views effectively shattered the notion of his own Jewish people, that they were more special, considering themselves to be God’s favourites as God’s chosen people. It is clear from Jesus actions and from this story that he no longer believed in the myth of the chosen people, for all people were God’s children, all people were God’s chosen people.
This was not in fact a new innovation on Jesus part. It is a view shared by Amos one of the earliest prophets. In words that would have shattered the Jewish/Israel sense of specialness in Amos 9:7 we read “Are you not like the Cushites to me, O people of Israel? says the Lord. Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?”
(Amos 9:7)
This verse is astonishingly universalist in tone. Amos is suggesting that Israel’s exodus from Egypt is not a unique saving act. Other nations, too, have experienced divine guidance and liberation. The Philistines and Arameans, even Israel's enemies, are also part of God’s providential care and concern. This would have deeply unsettled any idea that Israel alone was the object of God’s saving action. Amos relativises Israel’s special status, placing it alongside other nations in God’s care.
And so for Jesus in our passage today, he is saying to the Jewish lawyer that to live in harmony with the Eternal One is to expand the heart beyond care and concern for one’s own group. The true test of love, in harmony with the Eternal Heart of God, suggests Jesus in this parable, is how we love and treat those who are unlike us, even those we might consider enemies. This is deeply challenging stuff for all of us.
And so Jesus locates Eternal Life in the here and the now - precisely in the radical acts of kindness, mercy and compassion that cross ethnic and religious boundaries.
What might this parable say to our world today? It invites us to see the humanity in the ones we have been taught to fear and despise. To let compassion rise above history’s divisions. To let the grief and the pain of others matter as much as our own.
The Samaritan does not ask who the man is. He simply sees a fellow human being in need. This does not mean we ignore questions of justice or injustice or collapse moral distinctions or ignore cultural differences. But it does mean there is no path to peace unless we learn to see the other as neighbour and as fellow human being.
Jesus ends the parable not with a grand theological summary, but with a simple command:
“Go and do likewise.”
In our passage today, a religious lawyer stands up to test Jesus: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?”
It’s a big question, not just about what happens when we die, but as we see in Jesus response it is about how we live in the here and now. The Greek word often translated as eternal (aiōnios) doesn’t just mean “unending.” It means ‘of the age’, or ‘belonging to the divine realm’, the realm of the Eternal. So when the lawyer asks about “eternal life,” Jesus hears a deeper question:
“How do I live in harmony with the Eternal One? How do I live a life that reflects the Divine reality?”
Jesus answers, as he so often does, with a question of his own. He draws the man back to Torah (the Law): “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” And the man responds with the Shema, the very heartbeat of Jewish faith: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind, your neighbour as yourself.”
“You have answered correctly,” says Jesus. “Do this, and you will live.” In other words, you will live now, fully, divinely, in harmony with the life of The Eternal.
But, as many of us might be inclined to do, the lawyer seeks to narrow the field: “And who is my neighbour?” he asks.
That’s when Jesus tells a story, a story that shatters ethnic boundaries, a story that cuts to the heart of the Jewish-Samaritan divide. A story that speaks profoundly to our fractured world today. To fully feel the weight of this parable, we need to understand the history between Jews and Samaritans.
The Samaritans were descendants of Israelites left behind after the Assyrian conquest of the northern kingdom of Israel in the 8th century BC. These Northern Israelites had overtime intermarried with foreigners brought into the land by the Assyrians. While still maintaining their Hebrew religious heritage, over time, their religion developed a little differently. They had their own slightly different version of the Torah or Scriptures, they revered Mount Gerizim instead of Jerusalem, and rejected the Jerusalem Temple and priesthood in Judea.
The differences are interesting when looked at more closely...
The Samaritans, like the Jews accepted the first five books of Moses (the Torah) as authoritative: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.
And so interestingly both groups revered and shared the same core scriptures. They shared the same creation stories, the stories of the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob), the story of the Exodus from Egypt, the covenant at Sinai and the same laws of Moses
However, the Samaritan version of the Torah had some notable differences. The key difference included the central place of worship: The Jewish version of the Torah points to Jerusalem as the chosen place of worship (see Deuteronomy 12). The Samaritan version of the Torah points instead to Mount Gerizim in Samaria as the chosen holy place. This was a central theological divide, and is why the Samaritan woman at the well could say to Jesus in John 4:20–22: “Our ancestors worshipped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”
In addition to these shared scriptures Samaritans however rejected the scrolls of the Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel etc…), and also what is known as the Writings (Psalms, Proverbs, Danie...).
The real, fundamental break between Samaritans and Jews came after the Jews returned to Judea and Jerusalem after a 70 year exile in Babylon in 538 BC. When the Jews came back from exile in Babylon, especially under the influence of Ezra and Nehemiah they came back with a policy quite extreme ethnic purity. The books of Ezra and Nehemiah tell of how Jews were forced to divorce and send away their foreign wives along with children born of those wives. One can only imagine the suffering they endured. Some scholars say that the books of Ruth and Jonah were written as a direct challenge to this policy of ethnic purity and exclusiveness – showing God’s care towards foreigners.
It was this policy of ethnic purity from returning Babylonian Jews that led to a decisive break with those who became known as the Samaritans because the Samaritans were regarded as not ethnically pure enough to belong.
And so with this background, to the Jews of Jesus’ day, the Samaritans were religious deviants and ethnic half-breeds despite the fact that they shared some core religious beliefs and Scriptures and a common religious and genetic heritage. Samaritans, in turn, deeply resented being excluded and looked down upon by the Jews, whom they saw as arrogant and dismissive of their own ancient faith and traditions that also went back to Abraham and Moses. The Jewish historian Josephus records that, at one point, some Samaritans defiled the Jerusalem Temple by scattering human bones in the sanctuary, a shocking act in Jewish eyes. This was the kind of tension that existed between the two groups who avoided each others villages and who at times engaged in violent spats between each other.
And so when Jesus says in his parable, “A Samaritan came near, and was moved with compassion” he isn't just telling a nice story about kindness. He's breaking open centuries of division, suspicion and hatred. Imagine saying today in Israel-Palestine:
“A Palestinian child lay bleeding, and it was an Israeli settler or Israeli Soldier who stopped, bound the wounds, and paid for the child’s care…”
Or
“A wounded Israeli soldier was left on the road… and a Palestinian came near, saw him, and was moved with compassion…”
Jesus deliberately chooses the person the lawyer would least expect, or even despise, to be the hero of his story. Why? Why doesn’t Jesus affirm love within his own group? Why does he push the boundary? Why not just love your own? Because Jesus did not look at humanity through the eyes of nationalism or ethnic identity. He saw all people as members of one human family… He saw all people, Jews, Greeks, Samaritans and Romans as all equally children of God. His views effectively shattered the notion of his own Jewish people, that they were more special, considering themselves to be God’s favourites as God’s chosen people. It is clear from Jesus actions and from this story that he no longer believed in the myth of the chosen people, for all people were God’s children, all people were God’s chosen people.
This was not in fact a new innovation on Jesus part. It is a view shared by Amos one of the earliest prophets. In words that would have shattered the Jewish/Israel sense of specialness in Amos 9:7 we read “Are you not like the Cushites to me, O people of Israel? says the Lord. Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?”
(Amos 9:7)
This verse is astonishingly universalist in tone. Amos is suggesting that Israel’s exodus from Egypt is not a unique saving act. Other nations, too, have experienced divine guidance and liberation. The Philistines and Arameans, even Israel's enemies, are also part of God’s providential care and concern. This would have deeply unsettled any idea that Israel alone was the object of God’s saving action. Amos relativises Israel’s special status, placing it alongside other nations in God’s care.
And so for Jesus in our passage today, he is saying to the Jewish lawyer that to live in harmony with the Eternal One is to expand the heart beyond care and concern for one’s own group. The true test of love, in harmony with the Eternal Heart of God, suggests Jesus in this parable, is how we love and treat those who are unlike us, even those we might consider enemies. This is deeply challenging stuff for all of us.
And so Jesus locates Eternal Life in the here and the now - precisely in the radical acts of kindness, mercy and compassion that cross ethnic and religious boundaries.
What might this parable say to our world today? It invites us to see the humanity in the ones we have been taught to fear and despise. To let compassion rise above history’s divisions. To let the grief and the pain of others matter as much as our own.
The Samaritan does not ask who the man is. He simply sees a fellow human being in need. This does not mean we ignore questions of justice or injustice or collapse moral distinctions or ignore cultural differences. But it does mean there is no path to peace unless we learn to see the other as neighbour and as fellow human being.
Jesus ends the parable not with a grand theological summary, but with a simple command:
“Go and do likewise.”
RSS Feed