Hi there. I am Dr. Gilbert Soo Hoo, welcoming you back for the fifth episode of our series of talks on the topic, “My Work, Career, and Vocation.” Previously, I explained our vocation in terms of showing common grace for the common good. I had briefly alluded to Jesus’ well-known parable about the good Samaritan. Today I will go into it in more detail.

So it’ll be like a Bible study but hopefully digestible. But let’s do some preliminary preparation before diving in.

First, Jesus used a lot of parables to facilitate his teaching. Parables are short stories that are made up, that is, they’re fictitious yet realistic. That means the story could have happened back in Jesus’ time. Being observant, he was very familiar with the culture, traditions, and practices of his contemporaries living and working in a primarily agrarian society. The reason Jesus utilized the background that he shared with his listeners was for the sake of immediacy. By mentioning familiar scenes or situations, he easily and quickly triggered mental images in the minds of his audience. He eliminated the need for a long-winded description of the story’s setting, cast of characters and their behaviour. His listeners could fill in the gaps.

It’s like a comedian telling a joke. Unless the audience is familiar with the setting and assumptions behind the joke, they would fail to catch the force of the punch line. The intended humour falls flat and there’s no laughter. So too with Jesus’ stories. He wanted to make an impression or impact. He wanted his listeners to respond in a certain way.

But why did Jesus tell stories if he intended to teach profound truths? How can simple stories about ordinary life and people back then communicate abstract and hard to understand ideas? After all Jesus claimed to be the Son of God who ruled an eternal kingdom. His kingdom was not of this earth and he wanted to describe what it was like being a subject of his rule. He was a king but vastly different from any earthly king. We have to speculate because the Bible does not explain why.

Jesus’ strategy of story-telling leads to our second important factor. The people of his time only received the bare rudiments of an education. They were relatively uneducated compared to countries today that require their youth to go through years of schooling. Even though a number of people could read, reading material was not readily available unless you were well off, because having scrolls was expensive and production of these writings were done by hand. So only a limited number of copies were produced. Jesus’ society was primarily oral. Even students studying at rabbinic schools had to memorize their lessons without the aid of written notes. They would listen to the teachers’ lectures and learn by repeating the lesson out loud. Thus, Jesus had to keep his lessons simple enough to follow and be understood. Given the spectrum of any general audience where there’s a range of intellectual ability and education, Jesus wanted to be sure everyone, from the most accomplished scholar (like teachers of the law) to the illiterate farmer, could understand his message. Thus, the best approach is to tell stories.

Besides, all through history including today, people enjoy stories that paint vivid mental pictures, stir the emotions, and leave a lasting impression. Consequently, Jesus told stories or parables some of which are preserved in the Bible.

Now we’re ready to look at Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan. Actually, he never described the main character as “good”. It’s a label given by modern readers; but it’s accurate and serves our purpose well. It’s recorded in the third gospel Luke, chapter 10, verses 25 through 37. Jesus told this story in response to a question posed by an expert of the law who asked, “Who is my neighbour?” The lead up to his question was his earlier answer to Jesus’ own question, “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” In reply, the expert gave the two greatest commandments that we talked about in earlier episodes. Jesus then told the expert to obey so that he may inherit eternal life. The expert thought that he had already inherited the promise and wanted confirmation by asking Jesus to identify the neighbour. Likely, he was confident that he loved his neighbour, namely fellow Jews or more specifically fellow experts of the law, a very select group, a very narrow definition for neighbour. Jesus’ parable was meant to expand his definition to include much more.

But instead of telling him the definition directly Jesus wanted him to figure it out on his own. As an excellent teacher, Jesus knew that if he could get his student, the expert of the law, to think things through and draw his own conclusion, it would be more convincing and memorable. Then he would more likely expand his own definition and see people in a new light.

Jesus also knew the expert of the law was overconfident. So Jesus had to find a way to shake him out of his smugness by shocking him. Jesus did this by choosing the most outrageous example of a neighbour he could think of. Knowing the historical background of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans, Jesus deliberately chose the Samaritan. He knew that the expert would never view any Samaritan favorably. The social distance between the two groups was so wide and unbridgeable that it was inconceivable for the expert to agree to Jesus’ position if he simply told him the answer. He needed convincing. The story drew him in so that he could picture what Jesus described. Jesus wanted him to feel and vicariously experience the Samaritan’s compassion for the Jewish victim of a mugging in a remote place. It was dangerous with the threat of robbers. Coming from Jerusalem we infer that the traveler was Jewish since no self-respecting Samaritan would ever enter the city. Jesus brings in two fellow travelers, a priest and a Levite, two elite members of Jewish society, knowledgeable about the law just like the expert. Thus, we infer that Jesus wanted him to identify with those two. Yet, in the story those two ignored the victim, lacking compassion. So they were not neighbourly even toward a fellow Jew. We have to speculate on the expert’s reaction to the behaviour of his peers, likely disappointment and perhaps some guilt as he himself may not have been so neighbourly either.

Then came the shock of hearing about the Samaritan coming to the rescue. The victim was a total stranger and the archenemy Jew. Yet, the Samaritan felt compassion and substantially helped him by treating his wounds, mounted him on his own donkey, took him to an inn and paid for lodging until he recovered. All this amounted to significant cost to the Samaritan—time, money, and the possibility of being attacked when encumbered by the unconscious man. Yet, the Samaritan did not hesitate nor complain. He gave generously without expectation of recognition or compensation.

At the conclusion of this story, Jesus pointedly asked the expert, “Which of these three (the priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan) do you think was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” The expert replied, “The one who had mercy on him.” Notice that the expert did not call the hero of the story “Samaritan” but “the one who had mercy.” He drew the conclusion Jesus wanted him to make. Then as the punchline, Jesus stated, “Go and do likewise.” Be a neighbour like the hero of the story to others, even to those for whom you have no natural affinity and may even have an aversion.

If we label people—in Jesus’ day “Jew” and “Samaritan”—that tends to build barriers preventing us from showing mercy, whether to a loved one, a stranger, or even the enemy. The concept of neighbour overcomes labels and categories that contribute to prejudice. We should see anyone within our reach as potential neighbours. It will cost us as it did for the Samaritan. We take stock of our resources. We identify potential barriers to compassion and mercy. We ask, “What’s stopping me?” And more importantly, “Who is my neighbour?” What acts of compassion and mercy are called for? We hear Jesus’ admonition: “Go and do likewise.”

The good Samaritan did not look at the victim and thought “Jew”. Instead, he thought, “Here’s an unfortunate human being in desperate need of help. I need do something now.” He took immediate action, figuring out the next step as he went along. Likely, he quickly evaluated the situation before forming and executing his game plan. And he got it done. The former victim was now safe and stood a good chance of recovering. Interestingly, the Samaritan left the man in the innkeeper’s care until he returned. Perhaps he continued on with his journey to fulfill his business. Thus, this interlude was a few days’ interruption of his business trip. He was responsible for his own affairs as well as for the man.

The proverbial Samaritan is our example and role model. Dare we follow in his footsteps?  Throughout history since Jesus’ day, he is known as the good Samaritan. Are we good neighbours? Will we go and do likewise? Will we dispense common grace for the common good?

Next time we will look at our own story and ask, “Who is my neighbour?” But for now, I close episode 5 of our series on work, career, and vocation. Until then have a safe and fulfilling day.

Questions and Comments

1. Who would be a contemporary “Samaritan or Jew” to you?

2. Do you think the Samaritan had personal limits as to how much he would help?

3. With the threat of mugging, was the Samaritan foolish in exposing himself to danger?