Parable of the Good Samaritan is Misunderstood

cloudyday2 said:

Why "the good Samaritan" instead of "the good Roman"? If "neighbor" is the word then it seems that "the good Roman" would work just as effectively as the "the good Samaritan". But if "fellow Jew" is the word then "the good Samaritan" is much better, because the reason Jews hated Samaritans was that they were phony Jews with a phony Torah and a phony Temple. A Samaritan by definition was as wrong by the letter of the Law and the priest and Levite were correct by the letter of the Law. A Roman had no law, so "the good Roman" wouldn't work nearly as well if the question was "who is a Jew?"

Click to expand...

cloudyday2 said:

As I have continued to read "The Exodus" by Richard Elliott Friedman, I came upon a chapter devoted to this very question on the Golden Rule. Friedman noted that most of his fellow scholars share my opinion that "neighbor" in the Golden Rule means "fellow Jew", but Friedman disagrees. He says that the list of laws in Leviticus is so disorganized and redundant that there really is no context for anything. The fact that the words immediately before the Golden Rule apply to fellow Jews does not imply anything about the meaning of "neighbor" in the Golden Rule. And the fact that there is another verse later in that chapter that specifically commands kindness for non-Jews living among Jews does not imply that the Golden Rule doesn't redundantly command the same thing.

And so He made man in His own image in His own image He made man,man and woman He made them.

If this is so, how can anyone say they love Him and at the same time hate another human who was also made in His image, if it is so?

Deuteronomy 30:16.

Using it wrongly to justify ones actions is wrong.

David prayed that no one should come to harm him
so that he would not have to harm them.









So that is an interesting point of view. It makes me a little less certain that "neighbor" in the Golden Rule meant "fellow Jew".

Click to expand...

cloudyday2 said:

Here is my idea. Tell me what you think.

Start with the golden rule in Leviticus 19:18. I would argue that "neighbor" should be replaced with "fellow Jew". There is a different verse, Leviticus 19:34, requiring love for immigrants/travelers, but it isn't worded quite the same and probably isn't the verse quoted in the parable. Here is how I would translate Leviticus 19:18
"You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your [fellow Jew] as yourself: I am the Lord." ( Bible Gateway passage: Leviticus 19 - Revised Standard Version )

Now consider the Parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37 and replace "neighbor" with "fellow Jew". After Jesus quotes the golden rule the teacher of the law asks "who is my [fellow Jew]?" Jesus uses the parable to show that being a Jew is about obeying the spirit of the Law and not about genetics or abstruse legal behavior. The Samaritan is revealed to be more Jewish than the priest or the Levite, because he followed the spirit of the Law by loving. ( Bible Gateway passage: Luke 10 - Revised Standard Version )

The advantage of using "fellow Jew" instead of "neighbor" is that Jesus actually answers the question that was asked of him rather than answering a question that wasn't asked.

Click to expand...

cloudyday2 said:

It seems to me that a theme of Jesus is the importance of spirit and intentions over physical action. To Jesus adultery was not about physical sex out of wedlock but about wishing to have physical sex out of wedlock. The wish makes the sin regardless of whether it translates into a physical act.

So following that theme, what makes a Jew is not genetics or physical conformance to the Torah. The Samaritan followed a heretical Samaritan Torah and worshiped at a heretical Samaritan Temple, but the spirit and intentions of the Samaritan were Jewish, therefore the Samaritan was a fellow Jew.

Click to expand...