(3)
Scripture Reading: Luke 10:25-37
In Luke 10:25-42 we have two matters: the Man-Savior portraying Himself as the good Samaritan with the highest morality (vv. 25-37) and His being received by Martha at Bethany (vv. 38-42). It is significant that Luke put these two matters together. Apparently they are not related; actually, in our Christian experience, the Lord as the good Samaritan is related to His being received by Martha. In this message we shall consider the portrait of the Lord as the good Samaritan with the highest morality, and in the following message we shall consider His being received by Martha at Bethany.
We have seen that in Luke 9:51-56 it was necessary for the Lord Jesus and His followers to pass through Samaria. The Samaritans, however, did not receive Him (Luke 9:53). Now in Luke 10:25-37 the Lord portrays Himself as a Samaritan.
In the parable of the good Samaritan many things are covered. This parable refers to Judaism, the Old Testament, the law, the priests, the Levites, Christ, the Spirit, the divine life, the church, the way to bring people to the church, the blessing the Lord gives to the church, the Lord’s coming back, and the Lord’s reward to the church.
Samaria was the leading region of the northern kingdom of Israel and the place where its capital was (1 Kings 16:24, 29). Before 700 B.C. the Assyrians captured Samaria and brought people from Babylon and other heathen countries to the cities of Samaria (2 Kings 17:6, 24). From that time, the Samaritans became people of mixed blood — heathen with Jew. History tells us that they had the Pentateuch (the five books of Moses) and worshipped God according to that part of the Old Testament. But they were never recognized by the Jews as part of the Jewish people.
In John 8:48 certain Jews said to the Lord, “Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?” Here in Luke 10 the Lord refers to Himself in a positive way as a Samaritan. The Lord seems to be saying, “I am a Samaritan, one despised by you.”
Luke 10:25 says that “a certain lawyer stood up and put Him to the test.” A lawyer was an expert in the Mosaic law. Such a lawyer was a scribe among the Pharisees. This lawyer, one very knowledgeable in the law, was also proud. Being one who justified himself, he stood up to test the Man-Savior.
In testing the Man-Savior, this lawyer said to Him, “Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?” To inherit eternal life is to be rewarded in the coming age (Luke 18:29-30) with the enjoyment of the divine life in the manifestation of the kingdom.
To inherit eternal life is also “to enter into life” (Matt. 19:17). To enter into life is to enter into the kingdom of the heavens (Matt. 19:23). The kingdom of the heavens is a realm of God’s eternal life. Hence, when we enter into it, we enter into God’s life. This differs from being saved. To be saved is to have God’s life enter into us, whereas to enter into the kingdom of the heavens is to enter into God’s life. The former is to be redeemed and regenerated with God’s life; the latter is to live and walk by God’s life. The one is a matter of birth; the other is a matter of living.
According to the New Testament, to receive eternal life is one thing, and to inherit eternal life is another thing. To receive eternal life is for our salvation in this age, but to inherit eternal life is a reward in the coming age, that is, in the coming kingdom. It is important, therefore, that we differentiate these matters concerning our experience of eternal life. Now, in this present age, we may receive eternal life and experience it. This is a matter of salvation. But inheriting eternal life will be a blessing given to us as a reward in the coming age of the kingdom. Thus, inheriting eternal life is not a matter of salvation; instead, it is a matter related to the kingdom reward.
When the scribe asked the Man-Savior about what he should do to inherit eternal life, the Lord said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” (v. 26). The lawyer answered, “You shall love the Lord your God from your whole heart, and with your whole soul, and with your whole strength, and with your whole mind, and your neighbor as yourself” (v. 27). To this the Lord replied, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you shall live” (v. 28).
Luke 10:29 goes on to say, “But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, And who is my neighbor?” The one who asked this question must have been one of the self-justified Pharisees (16:14-15; 18:9-10). As a display of his pride, he asked the Lord who his neighbor was. He seemed to be telling the Lord, “Who is my neighbor that I may love him?” In the parable that follows, the Lord answered the lawyer by showing him that he did not need a neighbor to love. Instead, he needed a neighbor to love him. Because he is not able to love, he needs someone to love him. As we shall see, this neighbor is the good Samaritan.
The parable of the Samaritan is one of the unique parables narrated only by Luke. This parable conveys the principle of high morality in the Savior’s full salvation. The “certain man” in verse 30, in the Savior’s intention, signified the self-justified lawyer as a sinner fallen from the foundation of peace (Jerusalem) to the condition of curse (Jericho).
Luke 10:30 says, “Taking up this question, Jesus said, A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who having both stripped him and beat him, went away, leaving him half dead.” Jerusalem means foundation of peace (see Heb. 7:2), and Jericho was a city of curse (Joshua 6:26; 1 Kings 16:34). The words “going down” indicate falling from the city of the foundation of peace to the city of curse. Therefore, the certain man in this parable was falling from the foundation of peace to a place of curse. The way he was taking was the way of such a fall.
The man going down from Jerusalem to Jericho fell among robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead. These robbers signify the legalistic teachers of the Judaic law (John 10:1), who used the law (1 Cor. 15:56) to rob the lawkeepers like the self-justified lawyer. The word “stripped” signifies the stripping by the law misused by the Judaizers. The Greek word translated “beat” literally means “laid blows upon.” This beating signifies the killing by the law (Rom. 7:9-10). Furthermore, the robbers leaving the man half dead signifies the Judaizers’ leaving the lawkeeper in a dead condition (Rom. 7:11, 13).
All the Pharisees, legalistic teachers of Judaism, are here likened to robbers. The lawyer is likened to the one going down from Jerusalem to Jericho who fell among these robbers and was stripped and beaten by them. The legalistic teachers of the Jewish religion stripped people and beat them and then left them half dead. This was the situation of the lawyer, although he did not realize that he was in such a condition.
In verse 31 the Lord continues, “And by coincidence a certain priest was going down on that road, and observing him, he passed by on the opposite side.” The priest was one who should care for God’s people by teaching them the law of God (Deut. 33:10; 2 Chron. 15:3). In the parable, a priest was going down in the same way, but he was unable to render any help to the beaten one.
Verse 32 says, “And likewise also a Levite, coming down to the place and observing him, passed by on the opposite side.” A Levite was one who helped God’s people in their worship to God (Num. 1:50; 3:6-7; 8:19). This Levite came to the same place, but he also was unable to render any help to the dying one.
Verses 33 and 34 describe the actions of a certain Samaritan who came to the man who fell among robbers: “But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came down to him, and observing him, was moved with compassion; and coming to him, he bound up his wounds, pouring on them oil and wine. And placing him on his own beast, he brought him to an inn and took care of him.” This Samaritan signifies the Man-Savior, who was apparently a layman of low estate, despised and slandered as a low and mean Samaritan (John 8:48; 4:9) by the self-exalted and self-justified Pharisees, including the one to whom the Lord was talking in Luke 10:25 and 29. Such a Man-Savior, in His lost-one-seeking and sinner-saving ministry journey (19:10), came down to the place where the wounded victim of the Judaizing robbers was in his miserable and dying condition. When He saw him, He was moved with compassion in His humanity with His divinity, and rendered him tender healing and saving care, fully meeting His urgent need (vv. 34-35).
In 10:34 and 35 all the points of the good Samaritan’s care for the dying one portray, in His humanity with His divinity, the Man-Savior’s merciful, tender, and bountiful care for a sinner condemned under law. This shows to the uttermost His high standard of morality in His saving grace.
The Samaritan came to the man and bound up his wounds, pouring on them oil and wine. The binding up of the wounds indicates that He healed him. Pouring on the man’s wounds oil and wine signified giving Him the Holy Spirit and the divine life. When the Man-Savior came to us, He poured on our wounds His Spirit and His divine life.
The Samaritan then placed the man on his own beast, on a donkey. This indicates that the Samaritan carried him by lowly means in a lowly way. Many of us can testify that we were brought into the church in such a lowly way, carried on a “donkey.” We did not come into the church in a way that was splendid and glorious. On the contrary, we were brought into the church in a lowly way and by lowly means.
The Samaritan brought the man to an inn and took care of him. This indicates that He brought him to the church and took care of him through the church.
Verse 35 says, “And on the next morning, taking out two denarii, he gave them to the innkeeper and said to him, Take care of him; and whatever you spend in addition, when I return, I will repay you.” Here we see that the Samaritan paid the inn for the man. This means that He blessed the church for him. Furthermore, His promise to pay the innkeeper whatever he spent in addition points to whatever the church spends for him in this age being repaid at the Savior’s coming back.
In verse 36 the Man-Savior went on to ask the lawyer, “Which of these three, does it seem to you, has become a neighbor to him who fell among the robbers?” The self-justified lawyer thought that he could love another as his neighbor (v. 29). Under the blindness of self-justification, he did not know that he himself needed a neighbor, the Man-Savior, to love him.
In verse 37 the lawyer answered, “The one who showed mercy to him.” Then Jesus said to him, “You go and do likewise.” The Greek words rendered, “the one who showed mercy to him” may also be translated, “the one who dealt mercifully with him.” The self-justified one was helped to know that he needed a loving neighbor (like the good Samaritan, who was a figure of the Man-Savior) to love him, not a neighbor to be loved by him. The Savior intended to unveil to him through this story that he was condemned to death under the law, unable to take care of himself, needless to say love others, and that the Man-Savior was the one who would love him and render him full salvation.
In this parable we can see the Man-Savior’s divine attributes and human virtues. Concerning the divine attributes, we see the Spirit, the eternal life, the blessing, and the repayment. The giving of the Spirit, divine life, the blessing, and the repayment of the church are all related to the divine attributes.
The Lord’s human virtues revealed here include His compassion, love, sympathy, and care. Once again in this case, the Man-Savior’s human virtues are mingled with His divine attributes. It is difficult to clearly distinguish them by categories, because they are mingled to produce the highest standard of morality.
In the parable of the good Samaritan we see that the morality of the Man-Savior was a morality of the highest standard. When the priest saw the man who had fallen among robbers, he did not do anything to help him. It seemed that this priest did not have any morality at all. The situation with the Levite was the same. But when the Man-Savior saw the man in his pitiful condition, He was moved with compassion. Then He fully exercised His morality to care for the needy one. The Man-Savior’s high standard of morality was a product of a mingled life, a life in which the divine attributes are mingled with the human virtues. In this parable we clearly see that the Man-Savior carried out His ministry in His human virtues with His divine attributes.
