Last week, a lawyer asked Jesus, what is the greatest commandment? Jesus answered that it was to love God with everything, and love our neighbours as ourselves. Then, right after that answer, Jesus told a story:
But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.” (Luke 10:25-37 ESV)
Jesus set up a high standard, based on the Old Testament part of the Bible, that was undeniable for the lawyer. So, instead of challenging it, the lawyer tries to get around it. He tries to find a loophole, by asking Jesus to define neighbour. If he has to love his neighbour, perhaps he can choose who qualifies as a neighbour. Just the people next door? Just those of my race, religion, education or income level?
He’s asking the same question as many readers today – who exactly is my neighbour, so I can make sure I love the minimum number of people necessary?
So Jesus tells this story, known as the story of the good Samaritan. The two religious professionals, the Levite and Priest, are too concerned with ritual purity to stop. His first Jewish hearers might have been thinking this was an anti-clerical message about underdogs like them being heroes in contrast to prideful authorities.
But then Jesus introduces a Samaritan into the story as the hero. Samaritans and Jews avoided each other. There was lots of bad blood, that went back a long way. And yet Jesus makes him the hero. The Samaritan was a true neighbour, even to his enemy.
Jesus challenges the prevailing beliefs about what it meant to love God. Good piety includes loving care for others, not just purity.
Then he goes further, and tells the legal expert, “You go and do likewise.” He’s essentially saying, “Legal expert, be like this guy, who followed the law you claim to know. “
After hearing Jesus’ command to love our neighbour last week, how many of us tried to find a loophole? Is loving our neighbour really that bad? When I trained to be a paramedic, one of the first questions the class asked was, “When I’m off duty, do I have to stop and pull over if I see an accident?” The answer was no, you can drive past, but if you stop you need to stay until another professional takes over. There’s a loophole – a paramedic off duty simply can’t stop at every accident.
But as a Christian, is there a similar loophole?
Question: How have you tried to justify or rationalize not loving someone like yourself?
Loading Content...
Share a Link to this Message
The link has been copied to your clipboard; paste it anywhere you would like to share it.
Right after the Holy Spirit filled the apostles, and enabled them to speak in languages of the world, we find Peter starts speaking to the assembled crowds in Jerusalem. We’re going to read part of his speech or sermon. Remember where he is – he is in Jerusalem – the center of his Jewish nation and religion. He says some dangerous things! Let’s listen in:
This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says,
“‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”’
Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.
(Acts 2:32-41 ESV)
He starts by pointing out that Jesus, who died on the cross, was no longer dead. Raised up, and there were witnesses. Peter and his fellow apostles, and everyone around them was, by implication of being in Jerusalem in those days, probably aware that Jesus was crucified and people claimed he was alive. Missing body was probably newsworthy, up for debate.
Peter tries to make an important point by referencing their beloved former king, David. While he was alive, David wrote about someone – the Lord – sitting at God’s right hand and having seen their enemies overcome.
Was David talking about himself? He was certainly a great king. But he’s dead, he wasn’t raised or ascended to heaven, like Jesus, who fits this description quite nicely. Connecting Jesus and David means Peter says Jesus is a king, or the king they have been waiting for. He names him Christ – the anointed one. Jewish Kings were anointed, but there was always talk in the Bible of a special king, the king, the anointed one, who they called the Messiah. David was merely a prototype, not the real deal. Jesus is.
Then he thrusts his argument home. You crucified your Messiah, your king. This was a Jewish audience, but they weren’t the only ones complicit. The Romans were involved as well, once Jesus was handed over for trial. They are all implicated together, all of humanity is responsible. But Peter is talking to his fellow Jews, so he says you crucified your own King, knowing he is indicting his own people. He essentially says, we should have known better, even when the Romans didn’t.
And the Bible says they were cut to the heart.
Question: What does it mean to be"cut to the heart"? Why were Peter's audience cut to the heart? Have you ever had the experience of suddenly realizing how wrong you were about something important?
