Eternal Perspectives

Let’s start with a quick quiz. One question, multiple choice:

Which of the following beliefs were closest to the teachings of Jesus in the parable of the Good Samaritan?

A. The theology of the priests and Levites
B. The theology of the Sadducees
C. The theology of the Pharisees
D. The theology of the Samaritans
E. A and B
F. None of the above

To find the answer, let’s look at the familiar story another time (Lk 10.25-37):

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
27 He answered: “‘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, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead.
31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side.
32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.
33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him.
34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him.
35 The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.” Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

BRAD YOUNG will HELP US think our way through the parable, beginning by getting us to hear it with the ears of Jesus’ original audience: first-century Jews.

In the mind of the people, “Samaritan” was anything but good. The Samaritan was understood to be an enemy. Though Samaritans accepted the five books of Moses as authoritative for faith and practice, they rejcted the oral law and were not considered to be Jewish . . .

In contrast to the Samaritan, the Levite and the priest were true members of the Jewish communty and served in the temple. Alhough they were descended from the priestly families, they had one thing in common with the Samaritans. The priestly class from the time of Jesus was almost exclusively composed of Sadducees, and like the Samaritans, the Sadducess rejected the oral law.

Because we know the end of the story, we “know” that the Samaritan is the good guy. Not for the people then. To modernize it, substitute your favorite enemy for “Samaritan:” Democrat? Republican? Muslim? Abortionist? American? Mother-in-law? Whoever that person might be, that’s how the Samaritans were viewed by the Jews.

Young continues his emphasis on the oral law during the times of Jesus:

The oral law, which was accepted by the Pharisees and the majority of the people during the period, taught that preservation of of life supersedes all other laws. The Sadducees, having rejected the oral law, interpreted the Scriptures in a literal fashion. They emphasized religious and ceremonial purity. Unlike the Pharisees who interpreted the law in a way to give it practical application in daily living while preserving its validity, the priests and the Levites preferred to adhere to the letter of the law.

So the priests and Levites - who were likely Sadducees - rejected with oral tradtion and held to the letter of the law. The Pharisees, in contrast, promoted the spirit of the law and had a hierarchy of values.

There is another cultural issue to uncover. Jesus says that they left the man “half dead.” Young explains:

The term “half-dead” probably refers to the Hebrew word goses which had a technical meaning in the Jewish oral law. The goses is a dying man who is in agony. According to the Jewish oral law, most of these individuals will die . . . The rabbis were concerned that the goses would not receive adequate care. They ruled that the goses, i.e., dying person, must be treated as a living person in every respect . . . According to the oral tradition, every law in the Torah may be broken if it will extend and save life . . .

What if the Levite and the priest thought that he was dead? The written law teachs that a priest and a Levite cannot become ritually impure even for a member of their own family (Lev 21.11) . . . At least a literal interpretation of the written law would prohibit a priest or a Levite from burying an abandoned dead corpse. But this violated the oral law.

The Pharisees lived by a different code. In the oral law they have another tradition. The Oral Torah teaches that a person is required to bury an abandoned corpse . . . In fact, they taught that though the high priest himself may not become ritually impure to bury a member of his own family, he is required to become impure in order to bury an abandoned body . . .

In either case, whether the unclothed, beaten man in the middle of the road was dead or alive, the priest and the Levite were required to stop. According to the oral law, they either had to bury the dead or give life-sustaining assistance to someone in need. But they are Sadducees, and they reject the Oral Torah.

So the Pharisees have the same approach to helping people as Jesus. But what about the Samaritans’ theology? What was their position (and, thus, the position of the anonymous Samaritan in the parable)? Young explains:

One must not miss the connection between the Samaritan and the Sadducean priest and Levite. Not only do the priest and the Levite reject the oral law but also the Samaritans lived only by the written letter of the five books of Moses. From a religious perspective the Samaritan was endangering his ritual purity in the same way that the priest and the Levite may have become ceremonially unclean.

The theologian who had posed the question “Who is my neighbor?” understood Jesus parable. Although he could not bring himself to say the name, he knew that it was the Samaritan who was the true neighbor to the half-dead man in the road.

So, how did you do on the quiz? I had no idea prior to reading Young’s treatment of the parable, and the cultural information he provides puts the story in a different and clearer light. As Young says, “my enemy is my neighbor!”

The parable teaches that the neighbor is not the man in need of life-giving assistance but the enemy. The key for understanding the parable is Matthew 5.43, where Jesus teaches us to love our enemies . . .

The parable communicates its message to the uninitiated, but it also reaches the scholar and the theologian on a deeper level. Everyone should abandon prejudice ad love all people - even someone who may be considered to be an enemy. The message of Jesus in the parables seeks a response. Jesus said to the theologian, “Go and do likewise.”

Taken from Brad H. Young Jesus: The Jewish Theologian (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1995), pp. 165-169. Available through Christian Books Distributors (click link above).