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.
Yesterday, we read this:
And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved. (Acts 2:42-47 ESV)
Yesterday we focused on the first two practices: Devotion to the Apostles’ Teaching and Fellowship, and the Breaking of the Bread. Today we’ll look into the other two:
The Prayers
Their community started this way at Jesus’ command: wait and pray for the Holy Spirit. They had a big mission, to spread his good news worldwide, and would need the Holy Spirit to make it possible. Their continued existence would require prayer, especially as they faced persecution and alienation.
Their Jewish tradition of temple worship and sacrifices for individual sin was transformed into Christian prayer in the temple. All Acts says here is that they were attending the temple. It says nothing about them continuing the sacrifices, and it seems likely they would have no more sacrifices, since Jesus was descrbied in the Book of Hebrews as the ultimate sacrifice for sin. No evidence they participated in the sacrifices, but they seem to have prayed there, which was incredibly bold and dangerous.
Common Life
They had all things in common. That could mean a lot of things, but it goes on to say they were selling their possessions and distributing the proceeds to those in need.
This is controversial, of course, because it makes us wonder if we need to do the same.
First, did they do what we think we read here? Well, note that it says they were “selling” instead of “sold”. There seems to be an ongoing activity of supporting each other as needs arose, not a one time liquidation. Secondly, note that they broke bread in their homes, which means some still had a home. They didn’t all become homeless, even though Jesus was. Surely some did, but not all.
Whatever the details, it’s clear they suddenly saw their possessions differently, or at least the needs of others. They became generous in a new way. Surely that endures as a principle to hold today, however it’s expressed, in vows of poverty or in opening one’s home to a friend in need.
Question: To what extent does your attitude toward your possessions reflect theirs?
