Good Samaritan

  • Thread starter Thread starter Qwikness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

Qwikness

Guest
Is the parable of the Good Samaritan an example of faith alone vs. faith and works. The priest and Levite has faith but passed by the victim. The Samaritan actually did something.
 
The Parable of the Good Samaritan is clear.

One inherits Eternal Life by Love.

Side point, all of the people in the parable are headed away from Jerusalem.

They are headed to wickedness; they are moving away from holiness.

Back to main point: The Samaritan, because he loves, inherits Eternal Life.

Side point: the victim is striped: He is striped of his faith, love, hope, generosity, chastity and other spiritual gifts. (Over all of these gifts, PUT ON LOVE–CHRIST!).

He is not stripped of his clothing for the body.
 
Yes. it is that. But could it be used for faith and works. I think so.
 
The parable wasn’t about “works” and “faith”, but “Who is my neighbor?” The Samaritans were a hated people by the Jews…and visa-versa…I would think when reading the parable in this day and age, we’d not ask what it tells us of “faith” and “works”…but ask us the same question…“Who is my neighbor” and “What should my response be to my neighbor?”
 
St. Luke’s Gospel is really, really, really clear.

In chapter 10: 25-28 one inherits Eternal Life by love–God’s love and our love!

It is obvious, as obvious as the sun causes our light.

Love is the greatest, in the sense that it is first.

Love is first in the sense of principle–not numerically.

Love is first in the sense it is in charge of our Salvation.

The Samaritan is not a Jew.

The Samaritan is not a Christian.

The Samaritan is Loved by God and loves the victim.

The Samaritan loves a great sinner.

Again, faith is subordinate to love.

The Samaritan is never said to have faith–only Love.

In fact, the Samaritans did not believe correctly.

They did not worship at the correct Temple.

They did not do the Torah.

The Samaritan did love and thus receives Eternal Life.

Further, St. Paul yells the limits of faith in I Corinthians 13. He then yells the infinite power of Love. He yells the same in Galatians 5: 6. James concurs with this.

It is love that saves.

Love Saves!!!

This is the teaching of Jesus and the entire Old Testament and the entire New Testament.
 
I know it wasn’t “about” works but a work was used. So I think if an argument came up one could point to the works of the good Samaritan as saying Believe and Do. Don’t just believe and walk by.
 
Samaria was the former land of the ten northern tribes of Israel. When the ten northern tribes were exiled into Assyria, the king of Assyria brought non-Jews from five other nations to intermarry with the Jewish remnant in the land. They and their decendants continued to worship the God of Abraham but worshipped the gods of the nations of their origin right along side.

The “Samaritan” in Jesus’ parable was a decendant of these intermarried Jews and gentiles, and Jews had nothing to do with Samaritans. Jews wouldn’t even set the soles of their feet on Samaritan land lest they be defiled.

But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” (Luke 10:29)

This was the question to which Jesus responded with the parable.

Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” (Luke 10:36)

This was what Jesus askes his audience at the end of the parable.

Remember that the parable was spoken to Jews as a means to teach Jews, and as I see it has less to do with faith vs works than it does with Jew vs Gentile.

-Tim-
 
One may certainly say that.

However, Jesus’ point is often missed by most people.

When asked which commandment is first–He always says love.

I tried to stay away from the arguments.

The teaching of Jesus is clear–love saves.

If one says I hate my wife–why argue?

I know I love her. She knows I love her.

To argue about false things is going to lead to making enemies, creating anger, possibly to hate.

If Luther taught one is saved by faith alone, let those that believe Luther, believe Luther.

Two plus two is four!

There is no point in arguing that it isn’t five or three or five thousand.

St. Thomas teaches–we believe and then explain.

His idea is the constant teaching of the Church.

We believe and then explain.

Luther believed something different than Jesus.

I am putting the light on Jesus.

If one cannot accept the clear teaching of St. Luke’s Gospel, they are not going to believe little Jimmy Baur–no way–it aint gonna happen.

Again, the abortion issue. To yell–“Freedom of Choice” is to confuse the issue. A human life is being destroyed. The mother, father, child, grandparents, extended families and society is going to be hurt. All of the side arguments might lead to hate, anger and creating enemies. The issue is: What is the most loving thing one can do for one’s unborm child? Love her!

Again, we Christians believe in the beauty of CHASTITY. Those that don’t, don’t.

I cannot prove chastity is beautiful. They must believe. Then we can talk about how it is. Our arguments do not make chastity beautiful. We believe it. Then we can explain. My stupid little arguments will not prove anything in faith–not even abortion or murder as being harmful–harmful for all of us that are involved.

Faith then reason.

Not reason then faith.

I am typing fast, forgive any and all mistakes.

This might sound incorrect. The demonstrations for the existence of God are preambles to faith. They demonstrate the existence of all that we see must have been made by a god. It does not prove anything about Moses’ writings being correct.

After we believe in a creator, then St. Thomas’ proofs are really helpful.
 
TimothyH said:
as I see it has less to do with faith vs works than it does with Jew vs Gentile.
Click to expand...
As I said, the parable isn’t about works but I think it could be used. One could look at the Priests and the Levite in the Samaritan parable. They don’t help the victim. But they may believe in God. So If one just believed and did nothing this is an an example of faith without works. And so they are bad guys.
 
TimothyH said:
Samaria was the former land of the ten northern tribes of Israel. When the ten northern tribes were exiled into Assyria, the king of Assyria brought non-Jews from five other nations to intermarry with the Jewish remnant in the land. They and their decendants continued to worship the God of Abraham but worshipped the gods of the nations of their origin right along side.
Click to expand...
Which is the Jewish claim. Samaritans, meanwhile, assert that they, the remnants of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (as well as some of Levi thrown in), have preserved faithfully the ancient religion (where the Tabernacle is on Mount Gerizim) and claim that the Jews were the descendants of those who followed a renegade priest named Eli who built his own (illicit) sanctuary in Shiloh. The Assyrians have their own version of events as well: the Samaritans were said to have allied themselves to a rival king, prompting the Assyrians to attack them. The survivors were settled in Assyria, and other conquered peoples legally counted as Assyrians - identified in one inscription as “the Tamudi, Ibadidi, Marsimani and Hayappa, who live in distant Arabia, in the desert, who knew neither overseer nor commander, who never brought tribute to any king” - were sent to repopulate Samaritan territory. The fun part is, DNA tests seem to show that the assertions of all sides contain some historical truth.

Samaritanism entails belief in only one God, the authority of the Torah (as they interpret it) given by God to Moses, and the sacred status of Mount Gerizim as the place chosen by God.
 
I do agree with the OP, it could be used that way.

I have only read one time, and cannot recall ever hearing, they were all headed away from Jerusalem. The texts clearly says they were headed to Jericho. They were making haste to get to Jericho. They were making haste to get away from the Holy City of Jerusalem.

Also, rarely is our spiritual clothing stated. The figure of speech has a literal meaning–our garment of love. And love covers all the other good dressings.

It is like with Sundays reading and divorce.

The lady can write a bill of divorce. The priest only made the PC statements about male pigs, and did not point out that the lady clearly had rights.

GOSPEL: Mark 10; 2-16. Pharisees came up and in order to test Jesus asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away.” But Jesus said to them, “For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, " God made them male and female." " For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one." So they are no longer two but one. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.”
And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
And they were bringing children to him, that he might touch them; and the disciples rebuked them. But when Jesus saw it he was indignant, and said to them, “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God. Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands upon them.

Sorry! I talk too much.
 
Another opinion: The US Supreme court does not have the power to legislate. However, because of the hardness of the US citizens, the Supreme Court legalized abortion.

The O. T. does not allow divorce and remarriage. It is the lack of faith of those who misinterpret those passages that deal with divorce in the O. T.

Well as I said, that is my opinion and interpretation. I do not know if I am correct. And I really mean that!
 
I can’t believe that no one has said this, but the reason it is called the parable of the “GOOD Samaritan”, is because in the eyes of the Israelites it is exceptional that any Samaritan would do something good.

It’s kind of like the story of Ruth. We could easily call her “the good Moabite” today.

I heard a sermon from a Baptist pastor, who said that if you had a group of 60 Samaritans, and they all individually passed the person on the side of the road, that none of the would have helped them. That is why what this Samaritan did was truly exceptional… enough to tell a parable about it.

That is important cultural background to understand this parable.

So, it’s not a denunciation of faith, it’s a call to practice what you preach. As others have said, the Samaritans were Jews too, they also served the God of Jacob, however they were very sinful as a people, and had backslidden to worship pagan gods. All three men that passed the person on the road had faith. But, only the Samaritan acted on that faith in his daily life.

IE: two men who are described as “holy” or “good practicing Jews” did nothing. Yet, the man who is described as a very sinful Jew, or a Jew of ill-repute in the community was the one that did something and helped the guy on the side of the road. All men had faith.
 
patrick457 said:
Which is the Jewish claim. Samaritans, meanwhile, assert that they, the remnants of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (as well as some of Levi thrown in), have preserved faithfully the ancient religion (where the Tabernacle is on Mount Gerizim) and claim that the Jews were the descendants of those who followed a renegade priest named Eli who built his own (illicit) sanctuary in Shiloh. The Assyrians have their own version of events as well: the Samaritans were said to have allied themselves to a rival king, prompting the Assyrians to attack them. The survivors were settled in Assyria, and other conquered peoples legally counted as Assyrians - identified in one inscription as “the Tamudi, Ibadidi, Marsimani and Hayappa, who live in distant Arabia, in the desert, who knew neither overseer nor commander, who never brought tribute to any king” - were sent to repopulate Samaritan territory. The fun part is, DNA tests seem to show that the assertions of all sides contain some historical truth.

Samaritanism entails belief in only one God, the authority of the Torah (as they interpret it) given by God to Moses, and the sacred status of Mount Gerizim as the place chosen by God.
Click to expand...
Interesting as always. Care to recommend sources for further reading/study?

-Tim-
 
Qwikness said:
Yes. it is that. But could it be used for faith and works. I think so.
Click to expand...
It could, since whatever the priest and the Levite might believe, their failure is clearly their lack of action.

It might be useful to put it with this:
Jas 2:15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
Jas 2:16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top