Ok, so you’ve gotten my point. Jesus is making a deeper point. What is it? 


Well, let’s dive into it. While we’re at it, we will keep accumulating evidence that this “Good Samaritan” story is far more than a simple story about a nice guy. 


First, this guy needs help because he is beaten up by robbers. Let’s pause here. If he needs help, why didn’t he fall into a ditch? Why didn’t he fall and break his leg? Why wasn’t he a guy who got cancer or his kid got kidnapped? Or his house burn down? Or he was attacked by a wild beast or bitten by a venomous snake? And you think – oh wait, robber is a euphemism for satan: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.” (John 10:10, also c.f. Matthew 13:19). 

 

Why does Jesus add that he was stripped/unclothed? When gangs are mugging a guy, is it common for them to stop take his underwear? (I assumed that they want to get away asap, before other people or police arrive) Everything in this parable makes sense without adding this detail. The reason is because nakedness is associated with shame and sin in Genesis in the Garden of Eden. This connection between nakedness and the shame of sin is echoed in Jesus’ warning to the church of Laodicea in Revelation 3:17-18 and in Revelation 16:15 (more on this theme below) 


Why does Jesus say that he was half-dead? The robbers could have just knocked him unconscious and went on their way, right? Or just beaten him up so he couldn’t walk or run after them, but not have him on the verge of death? “Because “the wages sin is death” (Romans 6:23). “We were dead in our trespasses and sins.” (Ephesians 2:1, Colossians 2:13) The New Testament idea is that sin/satan (represented by robbers) causes death, and Jesus connects these two idea in this story by writing in the robbers leaving him half-dead.  


Next, you have a priest and a Levite who pass by. Why priest and Levite? Why not just another Jewish person. Why not a doctor or a nurse? Why not a wealthy humanitarian donor? Why not a friend or family member? And then you remember: “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.” (Hebrews 10:4, also c.f. Galatians 3:21, Romans 8:3). The priest stands for any works done to try to make yourself a good person or to win God’s favor. Humans have been doing this for all time – there were priests even before Moses or Aaron (e.g. Melchizedek in Genesis 14, Moses’ father-in-law Jethro was priest of Midian etc.). Next, the idea of the Levite puts the focus specifically on the Jewish people trying to obtain salvation through the Old Testament Law and sacrificial system, although one could perhaps extend this to works done in any religious system (question: aren’t there many Christians who grow up in the church who think that salvation comes from going to church and serving/doing church activities but who later leave because they never knew God?).  


“But a Samaritan Nazi, as he traveled, came to where the man was...” (verse 33)


This is the crescendo of the story.  


You know what the crowd is thinking, right?  


A Jewish man gets injured on a deserted road. A Nazi happens to be walking by and sees him so he walks over. A black man in man 1950 gets injured on a deserted road. A Klansman happens to be walking by and sees him so he walks over. 


The audience is shaking and sweating at this point. Their blood pressure is going through the roof. They're thinking: we thought the robbers were bad - now he's in the hands of a Nazi. What is the Nazi going to do to the Jew? As Jesus describes the Nazi walking over to the man, they're thinking that the man is completely at the mercy of the Nazi. They're bracing for possibly some of the most grotesque and appalling torture (stuff that you wouldn’t think in your worst nightmare) to take place. 

 

But in the greatest plot twist of all time: “and when he saw him, he took pity on him.” "But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us...” (Ephesians 2:4) The Nazi kneels down and cradles the Jew in his arms like his own baby. This is the Gospel: the one who you thought hated you and wanted to destroy you, ended up being the only one who could save you and your greatest friend. 

 

Why did Jesus use a Samaritan in this parable? Because, as Romans 5:10 says: “We were enemies of God” and were “hostile” towards God (Colossians 1:21). As Jonathan Edwards would say, we were sinners in the hands of an angry God. “The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18) Because of our sins against God, we were supposed to be destroyed in hell for all eternity. This perfect God, who is so holy and pure that He cannot even look upon evil (Habakkuk 1:13) but instead must destroy any impure thing, is the one into whose hands we fell, and we were completely at his mercy. This is the point of the Samaritan/Nazi/Jihadist: this person (God) was someone who we expected to utterly obliterate us. We were enemies. Logic and sense said he would pour his wrath upon us and destroy us in hell forever. And the Gospel is that this God who we hated and thought hated us, was precisely the only one who could save us, and who did.  

 

Verse 34 begins with the Samaritan “coming to the man” Jesus came to us, reminiscent of "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost" (Luke 19:10) or Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" (1 Timothy 1:15). Romans 5:6 says, “at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly”; certainly we (and this man) were helpless, and the Samaritan/Jesus came at just the right time to save him/us.  

 

Next, “He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine.”


Again, we can ask questions about why Jesus chooses this content for his story. When you’re backpacking or going on a long hike, do you have bottles of oil and wine just hanging out in your bag? The answers are in Scripture. In the Bible, oil is intimately connected with anointing: the word for smearing (oil) is chrio (χρίω), which is translated “anoint,” carrying an implicated of being consecrated or appointed for a special and divine purpose. Thus, this man who was dead in his trespasses and sins was set apart by God for salvation.  


Then, what about the wine? “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28) and “the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin” (1 John 1:7). The wine is the washing and cleansing of our wounds (our sin) by the blood of Christ.  


The bandaging has many interesting interpretations. “He will bandage our wounds” is found in Hosea 6:1. Did the Samaritan just have bandages lying around his backpack? Perhaps more likely, he would have needed to take off his outer garment and use it to make bandages. Since the man was naked (so presumably cold), to help him heal, did the Samaritan then give the man his inner garment as well to clothe him? If so, then in the passage where Jesus talks about loving your enemies (super relevant here!) and says “And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well” (Matthew 5:40), we have a 3-way connection where Jesus is foreshadowing his death where he would willingly hand over both his tunic and cloak and hang naked on a cross, which is written in this parable when the Samaritan is naked. There are lots of interesting themes to explore here: nakedness in the garden of Eden was connected with shame, the first Adam fell and needed clothing, the second Adam willingly took that shame of sin, bearing our sins on a cross while naked. There is this idea of being “wrapped me in a robe of righteousness” in Isaiah 61:10. In fact, when I was discussing why Jesus included the extra detail about the man being “stripped” (Greek: ἐκδύσαντες), I did not include the detail that in every other instance of this word in the Gospels, it refers to Jesus being stripped of his clothing prior to the cross. This nakedness and shame of sin is one that we had, but for which Jesus took our place on the cross. 


Let’s move on to the donkey: “Then he set him on his own animal.” I think the idea of the substitutionary atonement of Christ, where Jesus trades places with us: bearing our sins in his body on the cross (1 Peter 2:24) and suffering under the wrath of God (Mark 15:34, 1 John 4:10), which we deserve, when we are declared righteous and innocent before God, is present in this passage. (Every analogy has its limits – perhaps we should expect the Samaritan to be beaten up by the robbers willingly, die, and come back to life – but then it would be difficult to build the exchange of sin-ravaged humanity with Jesus into this analogy). We some sort of substitution/exchange here, where, in contrast to the priest and Levite who perhaps were scared to stop to endanger their own lives, the Samaritan was willing to endanger his own life on the path filled with robbers by stopping and helping the man. We see the possible exchanging of clothing above. But perhaps we see the exchange most explicitly with the donkey. The Samaritan gets off the donkey, and the man gets on. I believe that the donkey is a symbol for the righteousness of God. Jesus gave up his righteousness, and now the righteousness and justification of Christ is what carries us forward in life. Jesus now has to walk, while we ride. Additionally, there may be supplies that the Samaritan now has to carry – before, they were carried by the donkey, now, these supplies (e.g. food and water that are now being used to keep the man alive) are perhaps being carried by the Samaritan – Jesus carries our burdens, in particular our weight of sin, while we are carried by his righteousness 

 

Finally: “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.’” (verse 35). This is another place where the story gets really weird and leaves us naturally wondering what Jesus’ real meaning is. Let's recap the story so far: 

 

“A Jewish man gets ambushed on a road and ignored by his friends and humanitarian workers. A Nazi sees him, and being filled by compassion, decides to risk his life to save the man. The Nazi somehow has oil and wine in his backpack, so pours those on the man’s wounds. Then, the Nazi drops the man off at the nearest hotel, and tells the hotel manager to take care of the man while he goes on a 3-month cruise.” 

 

So why in the world does Jesus build this part about leaving the guy for an innkeeper and going on a long journey into the passage? 


There are 5 other times in the Bible where Jesus tells a parable about a person going on a long journey and coming back: 


  1. Mark 13:34 - “It is like a man going on a journey who left his house, put each servant in charge of his own task, and instructed the doorkeeper to keep watch.” 
  2. Matthew 21:33 - “There was a landowner who planted a vineyard...Then he rented it out to some tenants and went away on a journey.” 
  3. Luke 20:9 - A man planted a vineyard, rented it to some farmers and went away for a long time. 
  4. Matthew 25:14-15 - "it is just like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted them with his possessions...And he went on his journey.” 
  5. Luke 19:12-13 -’“A man of noble birth went to a distant country to lay claim to his kingship and then return So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas. ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’” 


In every single instance that Jesus uses this concept, the person going on the journey is God, and the return of this person is the final judgment where people are called to give an account. Some of these parables include the rewards given to those who loved and glorified Jesus in their life, but most of them focus on those who did not: Jesus is using these parables to issue a warning that he hopes those currently on the wrong path will heed. In fact, lending even more credence to this idea, the word used in the Parable of the Good Samaritan for “return” is ἐπανέρχομαι. This is used just 1 other time in the Bible – and it is precisely Luke 19:15: ““He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money...” 

 

The message is clear. In every instance, the person going away is God, and God will come back and see if we followed his instructions. So the Samaritan is Jesus. And he will return and repay according to what we have done. What’s interesting in this instance is that it is assumed that this innkeeper will do as Jesus commanded. In other words, this innkeeper is assumed to be one of the people who invested his master’s resources wisely in the parables of Matthew 25 and Luke 19; in short, this innkeeper is a Christian. The “repayment” is the rewards this person received in heaven. What this Christian expended (time, effort, energy, pain) on Earth to serve Jesus, he or she will receive back as an eternal reward in heaven when Jesus comes back.  


Jesus is talking about discipleship here. This verse can be connected with Matthew 28:19-20: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” Jesus is commanding us (the innkeepers) to take care of other Christians. Thus, in this parable, we are simultaneously the “man” and the innkeeper: we are people who were destroyed by sin who Jesus saved and now are healing (being sanctified); simultaneously, he has given us a charge (especially for those who have gotten pretty healthy/mature) to disciple and take care of other Christians, especially those who are more immature since they were more recently saved.  


(We will talk about the next part concerning “neighbor” in Part III soon)