Are We Missing the Main Point of the Good Samaritan Story?
Recovering the early church’s interpretation of the parable
Growing up in a non-religious family the parable of the good Samaritan was one of the few Bible stories I knew. As an atheist, of course, I agreed it was good to be kind to those in need.
Is the parable of the good Samaritan just a morality tale? That we should be kind to strangers? This is a key application from the parable.
But are we the main character in the story? That hasn’t always been so. This article looks at how the early church interpreted this parable.
What must I do to inherit eternal life?
The context of this passage has often troubled me. Jesus tells the story in response to a question:
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” (Luke 10:25, NIV)
What should we take away from Jesus’ answer? That our acceptance before God depends on our morality?
The impossibility of keeping the law
Jesus, in characteristic fashion, bats the question back:
“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?” (Luke 10:27, NIV).
The expert in the law then quoted a summary of the 10 commandments. He rightly stated we should love God with all our heart and love our neighbour as ourselves (v28).
Yet the expert in the law got a little twitchy: “And who is my neighbour?” (v29, NIV) Many of us know the story Jesus told in response in Luke 10:25–37.
A sermon by Martin Luther argued Jesus’ purpose was to take him to the law — to show he could not keep it:
His will is that we should love him with all our hearts. This no man can do, and the conclusion is that we are all sinners, and especially those who walk in a beautiful outward show.
Is it about Jesus or us?
John Calvin was one of the key influences on our modern Scriptural interpretation. In his commentary on the Gospels, Calvin rejected the early church’s view of the parable — that Christ was the Good Samaritan:
And, indeed, any one may see that the curiosity of certain men has led them to contrive these speculations, contrary to the intention of Christ.
It is Calvin’s interpretation that won the day. He thought the main point of the parable was that we should care for the whole of humanity, not only those close to us:
But here, as I have said, the chief design is to show that the neighborhood, which lays us under obligation to mutual offices of kindness, is not confined to friends or relatives, but extends to the whole human race. (Calvin’s Commentary on Matthew, Mark and Luke, Volume 3)
Calvin, of course, is right that the parable teaches we must care for everyone. Early church fathers like Augustine, Cyril of Alexandria, and the reformer Martin Luther, also taught this.
Yet, the standard interpretation, up to that point, was that Christ was the Good Samaritan in the story. For it is only Jesus who loved God and neighbour perfectly. Only He could keep the law as the Samaritan did — loving his enemies with kindness and generosity.
Who is the helpless one — them or us?
In these challenging times, we may donate to a food bank or volunteer for various charities. Is this how we apply the Good Samaritan story — helping those in need?
Yes, that is an implication of the story. But if Jesus is the Good Samaritan, then there’s a deeper meaning. We are poor and needy too. As Luther pointed out:
If the poor wounded man had desired to help himself, it would only have been worse for him, he would only have done harm to himself and irritated his wounds, and only prepared more misery and distress for himself.
Many of us live in safe middle-class neighbourhoods. It is challenging to put ourselves in the man’s place. We often think such things only happen to those less fortunate or wise than us. Did he choose a risky route? Or a dangerous time to travel?
The Good Samaritan carries us
“Good” religious people (the Levite, the priest) walked by — too busy to stop. Then we see a stranger, whose help the wounded man had no right to expect.
The Samaritan had compassion for his enemy — a Jew. He identified with this broken and rejected person. The Samaritan binds up the man’s wounds and lifts him onto his donkey. He takes the man to an inn and provides for his care.
The politics and culture of that time can feel obscure to us. We don’t understand the conflict between Jews and Samaritans. A contemporary example may help.
In June 2021, a far-right protester in London was getting a beating from a mob. Many people probably walked by. Others may have shaken their heads and muttered: “he’s getting what he deserved”. So the picture of a black man carrying this white supremacist on his shoulders to safety became iconic.
Luther saw the parable of the good Samaritan as a picture of the Gospel:
There is scarcely a more lovely picture in the entire Gospel, than where Christ the Lord compares himself to a shepherd, in Luke 15, who carries the lost sheep on his shoulders back to the fold. He still continually carries his lost sheep thus at the present day.
Application
It is only after we have experienced the love of the Good Samaritan (Jesus) that we can “Go and do likewise” (Luke 10:37, NIV). We love our enemies because he loved us first. We help those who are troubled because we also had no way out.
Evangelist Glen Scrivener sums up the application:
Don’t first conjure up the character of the good samaritan. First be the fallen man. First experience the compassion of this loving Outsider. Then go and do likewise.
This is not a simple morality tale. The centre is not our resolve to be good samaritans. The Centre is Christ Himself.
…
