Luke 10:29-32 29But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30Replying, Jesus said, “A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, and after stripping him and beating him they departed, leaving him half dead. 31Now by chance a certain priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32And likewise also a Levite, when he came to the place and when he saw, passed by on the other side.
The lawyer’s response to Jesus implies he was not totally sincere in his question but was looking more to trap Jesus. But often questions of doubt indicate a searching heart. Justify (dikaiōsai) can be interpreted as vindicate or to make his views acceptable. He wanted to justify himself in his own conscience but needed to bare his soul before God. The lawyer knew the answer but was hesitant to act on it. He had the head knowledge but lacked the sincerity and dedication to live it out. He had a narrow interpretation of what the Law taught and how far he was required to live it out. The lawyer was smart and knew the real issue. The Holy Spirit had pricked his conscience enough to get to the critical point of the identity of the neighbor.
In response to the man’s question, Jesus gave one of the most famous stories of his teaching. The story of the beaten man has been analyzed by every generation of believers. The meaning is clear, but the application is difficult. The lawyer could understand the story, but the real issue was if he would respond in the right way. The story is complete with a protagonist, antagonists, plot structure, conflict, scene and props, and resolution. Each part of the story has possible meaning and application. It is one of the most allegorized stories in the Bible. The story is true to the life situation of the time and hints and useful historical items. The lawyer and those who heard the story would have picked up on some of the details assumed in the background.
Verse 30 gives the scene and situation. The story focuses on the situation of a certain man who is unnamed. The man is the neutral character in the story, meaning he is the one in the middle of the antagonists and protagonist. His journey from Jerusalem to Jericho was down hill. Jerusalem is on a mountain 2,500 feet above sea level. Jericho is in the great rift valley at 1,800 feet below sea level. They are only 17 miles apart, so it is a rather steep descent. It was a well-traveled path, with many people coming and going. Many religious pilgrims made the trip for various rituals at the temple. There are multiple levels of conflict in the story. The first conflict is between the man and robbers. The road, like many others, was also notorious for highway robbers. Roman patrols helped with some of this. The unfortunate man had a bad day of travel when robbers caught up to him, beat him, and took all his possessions and even his clothes. He looked dead and was quickly on the way to it. From a literary perspective, it appears that this story would turn out to be tragedy with dying and soon dead man. But this verse only sets the scene. The conflict between the man and the robbers is only background and not the major conflict.
The major conflict of the story comes in verses 31 and 32. A certain priest, who is also unnamed and serves as a generic representation of all Jewish priests, saw the man and assumed he was dead. The priest followed the legalistic law that said that a dead person was ritually unclean. If the priest touched the dead body, he would not be able to serve in his capacity of as a priest. However, he was leaving Jerusalem and going on the same path to Jericho. His service in the temple may have been over and he was returning home. His response would have been no surprise and was the expected response of a holy and consecrated person like a priest. The unstated issue is that the priest never went over to check on the status of the man and if he was indeed dead. The priest even scooted over to the other side of the road, to get as far away as possible from the situation. He put his religious practices above the needs of the man. Obviously, the priest did not see the man as a neighbor. It was likely that most people going from Jerusalem to Jericho would have been Jews, so the priest was even neglecting to help a fellow Jew.
The second passerby was a Levite, a descendant of the tribe of Levi. Levites were the ones responsible for the worship of Israel and assisted the priests. In today’s terms, the pastor and associate pastor both neglected to check on the man. The Levite gave the same type of response as the priest and passed by on the other side of the road. The priest and Levite correspond to the “wise and understanding” persons of verse 21 who miss the key point of the gospel, and the revelation of God passes them by. Those who know better often are blinded by their religiosity and piety to the needs of the neighbor.
For older posts, click here.