Traveling Mercies

Textual introduction:  This is one of the most famous of Jesus’ stories, parables.  To really appreciate it, we need to understand the story behind the story.  That’s what I’ll try to open up this morning.

*********

Luke 10:25-37

Wow.  What a politician Jesus would have made.  He came from a humble background.  He was great with children.  He knew how to be a hit at really big picnics.  He didn’t mind being on the road for weeks at a time.  An opponent asked a tricky question and he replied with a story that people would eventually retell all over the world.  And no one seemed to notice he hadn’t answered the question!

Of course, the story Jesus told is known as the Parable of the Good Samaritan.  Because we’re so familiar with the parable we can easily forget how surprising this story would have been to those who first heard it.

London’s west end is famous as the home of the theater district.  Some of the world’s best-known actors appear in the plays, musicals, and operas produced there.  We visited the area a few years ago.   As we were looking at those amazing theater marquis one of our party almost walked into a post.   Unfortunately, the district is also a place where street crime is a familiar occurrence.

One evening a man was walking to the underground when he was attacked by two muggers.  They took his wallet, watch, and anything of value he was carrying, and then they knocked him to the ground and began kicking him mercilessly.  They left him bleeding on the street. 

As he lay there two couples passed by.   They were dressed in formal wear and obviously were on their way to the theater.  The mugging victim called out for help.  The men and women briefly looked his way then hurried on.  This happened a couple times as he lay there in pain.  Everyone seemed more interested in making the first act than in helping him.

Then, the door of a nearby pub opened and three men stumbled out into the evening.  They had obviously been drinking, drinking a lot.  As they walked past him, the man again cried out for help.  The trio saw him and hurried over to his side.  While two of the men got the mugging victim onto his feet, the other hurried back to the pub to call 999 (that’s 911 in British). 

The man survived.  I like stories with unexpected heroes.  So did Jesus. 

Luke’s account begins with a question from a “lawyer.”  This was not a man you would have write a will or draw up a contract.  He was an expert in the Law of Moses, particularly those religious regulations ordering the day to day life of Jews.  They researched the Mosaic Law in depth and sought to apply it to every conceivable situation.  Often they would meet to debate issues in order to approach some consensus on a point of law.  They might wrestle with important questions like the distribution of an inheritance or a sadly trivial question such as the propriety of eating an egg laid on the Sabbath.

They also taught the youth of the community—the males, that is—so they would be better equipped to lead lives worthy of their Jewish heritage. Finally, they advised the religious courts and sometimes served as judges on those courts.  As a group, they were highly regarded by the community.

So, one such lawyer approached Jesus with a question:  "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"  The lawyer would have known the answer to such a question.  No, he had an ulterior motive.  His question was designed to “test” Jesus, to see if he would say something that might be grounds for incriminating him, for denouncing him to the crowds who were attached to him.

As a question, it was uncomplicated.  What are the requirements to go to heaven?   Jesus had probably answered the question before but the man wanted to test Jesus’ orthodoxy.

Jesus answers the question with a question.  In essence, he says, “What does the Law say?  You’re the legal expert, you tell me.”  There’s a story that a young student at a synagogue asked his rabbi, “Why does a rabbi always answer a question with a question?”  The rabbi answered, “Why shouldn’t a rabbi answer a question with a question?”    It’s an old technique for teaching and Jesus was skilled at using it.

Well, the lawyer couldn’t resist that invitation so he pulls together a couple verses from Deuteronomy and Leviticus: 

"You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbour as yourself."

To this Jesus says, “Cool.  You got it.”  Okay, not exactly, he said, “"You have answered correctly. Do this, and you will live." 

Jesus would also use these verses to summarize the demands of the Law.  The statement deals with our responsibilities toward God and our responsibilities toward our fellow human beings. 

Those of us who are steeped in the tradition of salvation by grace, the idea that we are saved by God’s unmerited favor and not by any good works of our own, sometimes get a little disturbed when we read a statement like that.  We shouldn’t be.  The Bible has always taught that there are two ways of salvation.  We may be saved by grace.  Or, we may be saved by absolute, perfect, impeccable obedience to the divine law.  Occasionally, a student would ask W. T. Conner at Southwestern Seminary, “Dr. Conner, don’t you think if a man lives up to the light he has, he will be saved?”  Dr. Conner would reply, “Yes,” pause to let the shock sink in and then add, “Now, trot that man out.”  Dr. Conner knew, as we all know, that none of us can claim to have achieved the level of perfection the law requires.

Of course, the lawyer knew how demanding the Law could be.  He understood the appeal of refining those demands to make them more comfortable.  The Living Bible offer insight when it translates the verse, “The man wanted to justify (his lack of love for some kinds of people), so he asked, ‘Who is my neighbor?'”

The question “Who is my neighbor” was widely debated by the experts on the Law and the Pharisees.   Some Pharisees argued that the demand to love the neighbor extended only to other observant Jews.  Others offered a slightly more liberal interpretation.  No one thought of the “neighbor” as whoever you might encounter.  Perhaps the broadest interpretation of “neighbor” would have been “people like us.”[1]  Some argued that Samaritans could not be neighbors.

Be honest.  Haven’t you hoped there was some escape clause in that demand—“Love your neighbor?”  Haven’t you hoped some patient Greek scholar would discover the word “neighbor” in this command means “people like you” or “your kind of people?”  Don’t you wish a new manuscript would be found with a convincing new reading of this text, one that said, “Love your neighbor—unless your neighbor has hurt you, insulted you, or just failed to give you the respect you think you deserve?”

So, maybe this lawyer was hoping Jesus would give him an out so he wouldn’t have to take this verse so seriously.

Instead of diving into debate, Jesus told a story.  Remember, Jesus seemed to enjoy making the wrong people the heroes of his stories.  We see it in this story. 

The story began with a traveler on his way from Jerusalem to Jericho, about a fifteen mile trip.  It was a difficult trip in some ways; in those fifteen miles it went from Jerusalem at 2300 feet above sea-level to Jericho at 1300 feet below sea-level.  The road was rocky, steep, and isolated.  A desert.

We aren’t told much about the traveler.  Numbers of travelers took the trip.  Jericho was a popular destination.  Herod the Great, the king who ruled when Jesus was born, had beautified the city after it had been sacked by the Romans.  During Jesus’ day, it was an oasis with palms and fruit trees.   It was a good place to get away from the more crowded Jerusalem.  Consequently, people on their way there may have been carrying more than a little pocket change.

That the traveler became a victim of highwaymen would have surprised no one.  They knew the roads better than the casual traveler.  They used that knowledge to ambush the unwary, especially if they were traveling alone.

The thieves in Jesus’ story were thorough and violent.  They took everything the man had and beat him for good measure.  They were unconcerned as they left the traveler half dead beside the road.

Sometime after the thieves had gone, a priest happened by.  Historians tell us that many priests lived in Jericho when they were not serving in Jerusalem.  Jesus’ listeners knew this.

Anyway, the priest saw the beaten traveler.  Did he rush to his aid?  Did he give him a drink of cool water?  Did he try to get him to his feet and take him to shelter?  No, he passed by on the other side of the road.  No help came from him.

The priest had no way of knowing what kind of man this was.  He might not deserve his help.

Next, a Levite passed by.  Levites weren’t priests but they were professional religious helpers, assistants to the priests.  They provided a variety of services from keeping the temple tidy to singing in the choir.  Levites are mentioned only three times in the New Testament but were prominent in Israel’s history as a group dedicated to God and charged with the responsibility of modeling service to God. 

So, what did this Levite do when he saw the wounded traveler?  Nothing.  Just like the priest, he passed by on the other side of the road.

At this point, what was the lawyer thinking?  We don’t know but maybe he was thinking, “Okay, a lawyer is going to come down the road next and he will help that poor man.”

In any case, he was probably surprised by Jesus’ next words:  ^“But a certain Samaritan, as he traveled along, came down to where the wounded man was; and when he saw him, he was moved with pity and sympathy [for him].”

Jews had little regard for Samaritans.  This ill-will was born hundreds of years before. The Jewish people in Samaria had adopted some ideas and customs of the people who had moved in while the nation was under the heel of the Assyrians. 

Even though they eventually abandoned the pagan influences and returned to worshipping Yahweh, they were forever branded as traitors, as spiritual half-breeds by their neighbors to the south.  They weren’t even known as Jews anymore; they were now Samaritans.  Rejection begets rejection so the Samaritans rejected Orthodox Judaism in favor of their own version, a version that denied much of the Jewish scripture. 

Centuries later, few, if any, Jews had anything good to say about Samaritans and most Samaritans returned the compliment. 

Now, Jesus was talking about a Samaritan who had compassion on the poor victim of a mugging. 

If Jesus were telling this story down on the Worthington green this morning, he might have told about a poor family trying to find shelter for the night.   Jesus might have told of the megachurch pastor who hurried by the family to go an important meeting with the mayor.  He might have mentioned the leader of a charity on her way to receive an award who rushed past the family.

Then he might have told us how the family was finally helped to shelter and a good meal by the owner of the local strip club.

If you find that scenario a little disturbing, that’s just how the lawyer would have felt.

Before Jesus finished his story, he underscored the way the Samaritan help the wounded traveler.

34. He went up to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them. He then lifted him onto his own mount and took him to an inn and looked after him.

35. Next day, he took out two denarii and handed them to the innkeeper and said, `Look after him, and on my way back I will make good any extra expense you have.'

Just listen to the detail Jesus adds:

·         Instead of staying as far away as he could, the Samaritan got close to the wounded man.   He even touched those awful, bleeding wounds.

·         He used his expensive oil and wine to treat the wounds, knowing he would almost certainly not be repaid.

·         He sacrificed his comfort for the man’s sake, letting the man ride his horse or donkey.

·         He took the man to an inn and stayed with him until he felt it was safe to leave.

·         He left two days wages with the innkeeper to make sure the man would be taken care of while he was gone.

·         He didn’t plan to abandon the man;   he was going to check on him when he returned through the area. 

·         He committed himself to cover unforeseen expenses.

What a guy.  But remember this; although the Samaritans rejected most of the Jewish scripture, they accepted that portion including the words recited by the lawyer.  They knew the command “love your neighbor.”

Perhaps Jesus paused a moment to let the story sink in, then he asked the lawyer a final question.  It was a throwaway question.  Of the man who was used to weighing in on obscure points of the Law, Jesus asked, “Which of these three, in your opinion, was neighbor to the robbers' victim?" 

There’s not a lot of wiggle room when you face a question like that in circumstances like that.  So, the lawyer replied, "The one who showed pity towards him."

And, Jesus said, “You think!”  Okay, actually, he said, "Go and do what he did."

We don’t know what happened to that lawyer.  I hope he left a changed man.  Maybe he woke up in the middle of the night and said to himself, “Wait a minute, Jesus never answered my question.”

And, that was true.  Jesus had played a sanctified game of bait and switch.  Jesus had shifted the emphasis.  The real question was not, “Who is my neighbor?” but “Am I neighborly?”  I think we can look at the entirety of Scripture and say that being neighborly is to be thoughtfully loving.

Start asking that first question and you begin searching for opportunities to limit your pity and compassion.  Keep the second question in mind and you’ll measure each situation, not by the worthiness of the one in need, but by the call that God’s love has placed on you.

That challenges our tendency to selfishness and complacency. 

We come to see the problems in limiting the definition of neighbor. 

·         As we limit those to whom we will be neighborly we shrink the sphere of our influence.

·         As we limit those to whom we will be neighborly we suppress the evidence of God’s transforming work in our lives.

·         As we limit those to whom we will be neighborly we bequeath to our children prejudice, division, and hatred.

·         As we limit those to whom we will be neighborly we betray ignorance of the breadth of God’s love.

With that last in mind, there’s a final lesson here we can’t forget.  For centuries this story has been called “The Parable of the Good Samaritan.”   That’s a good title and I don’t intend to change it.  If I did, I might call it “The Parable of the Samaritan Who Didn’t Quibble.”  And I’d add a subtitle:  “Jesus’ Word to an Inquisitive Lawyer.”  Like that lawyer, we know the demands of the law.  Like that lawyer, in our hearts we know we don’t meet those demands.  Like that lawyer, we are looking for a loophole.  Jesus wants us to know there aren’t any.

I find a commentary on this parable in the Sermon on the Mount.  There, too, Jesus is speaking of loving one’s neighbors.  Listen:

“You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor’ and hate your enemy.
But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you!
              In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike.
             If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much.
             If you are kind only to your friends, how are you different from anyone else? Even pagans do that.
            But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.”

Perfect—that’s a scary word.  Not only are there no loopholes, we are to love like God loves.  Who among us does that?  Our only hope is grace and forgiveness. 

---

[1]  David Garland quotes a rabbi who puts these words into God’s mouth:  “If he acts as thy people do, thou shalt love him; but if not, thou shalt not love him.” (440)

The Uninvited

A funny thing happened on the way to this sermon.  On the Sunday I had planned to preach A Funeral Interrupted I received a call at 7:00 am telling me that the sanctuary was 120 degrees (that's almost 49 C).  There was a problem with the furnace.  Despite turning the furnace off, we realized it would still be in the mid-90s at church time.  Well, we decided it was just too hot to have church, so we didn't.  Consequently, I did not post a new sermon for last Sunday.  Such things happen. 

 

 

Text:  Luke 7:36-50

 

Textual Introduction:  Only Luke’s Gospel tells this story, reminding us of that writer’s characteristic interest in women touched by Jesus’ ministry.

 

*********

 

Why in the world would Jesus accept an invitation from a member of a group that so obviously opposed him?  Why put up with the hassle?  I think it must be that Jesus cared about the Pharisees. And he wanted this Pharisee to know about God's grace.

Pharisees appeared to be both intrigued by Jesus and repelled by him.  They were curious about his obvious understanding of the Scripture, yet disturbed by his association with all the wrong people.  Simon may have thought he could help get to the bottom of the Jesus puzzle.  So, he invited Jesus to a little dinner party.

This would have been a shining moment for the Pharisee so he may have followed the custom of allowing common people in to witness the banquet.  It was considered good for them to see how intellectual and religious their social superiors were.   If they behaved like good children, being seen and not heard, they might have  been allowed to take some of the leftovers from the meal.

The woman in this story would not have been allowed to attend.  Though Luke doesn’t spell out why she was thought of as “a sinner in the city,” many New Testament scholars believe she was a prostitute.  Whatever the reason for her reputation, the household servants would have been told to keep such people away.  But she somehow slipped past them.  So the stage was set for an amazing encounter.

Quietly she moved up to the place where Jesus was reclining at the banquet table (reclining on a large cushion with his feet stretched behind him in the fashion of the day).  Middle-class and wealthier homes would have had chairs and tables but using “banqueting cushions” was considered more elegant.

Once there, she bent over his feet began weeping.  Her tears were so copious that they made trails through the dust of the road which still clung to the feet that had walked so many miles to tell the good news.  In response, she used her long hair to wipe his feet dry. 

When they were dry she kissed his feet and then opened a bottle of perfume and began anointing them with the costly fragrance.  The language suggests she continued this for some time. 

Her actions invite speculation.  Did she come planning to give the perfume to the master so it could be sold to help the cause?  (Luke will mention women who contributed to the support of Jesus and in the similar account that takes place later; Judas argues that the perfume could have been sold.) If she were a prostitute, had the perfume played a role in her profession and would her giving it to Jesus signal her intention to leave that life forever?  I don’t think she came planning to wash Jesus’ feet.  She brought no water and a towel.  Surely she couldn’t have planned to weep enough tears to wash his feet.  Did she come planning only to pour her costly perfume on his feet, feet that should have already been washed by the host or his servants?  But, then, when she approached Jesus and saw his feet were still dirty did she realize what that meant?  Were her tears prompted by both loving gratitude to Jesus and distress because the one who had done so much for her had been treated so badly?

But Luke keeps us from too much speculation by turning our attention to Simon’s response to the woman’s behavior.  Frankly, he was disgusted, so disgusted that the incident resolved his questions about Jesus.

As Simon watched with horror, his mental processes began to assess the situation.  Surely, Simon thought to himself, anyone could see what she is.  A Pharisee, Simon would never allow such a woman to touch him. 

Before this, Simon may have been wavering in his opinion about Jesus, hoping the conversation at the banquet would either confirm or disprove the notion that Jesus was a prophet.  Apparently, Jesus’ allowing the woman to touch him was enough to persuade him that Jesus could not be a prophet.

Let me ask this:  How would Jesus have been expected to stop the woman?  Would convention allow him to use harsh, uncaring words?  Would it have been permissible for him to strike her or roughly push her aside?

At this point in the story, Jesus looks at Simon and says, “Simon, I have something to tell you.”  The language Luke uses is interesting.  He says, “Answering him, Jesus said.”  Now, Simon’s thoughts about the woman and about Jesus were unspoken but it was clear to Jesus what he was thinking.  Jesus knew what was in the heart of this proud, judgmental man.

After Simon encourages Jesus to speak, the Master Teacher tells a story, a parable.

" ⁴¹“Two men were in debt to a banker. One owed five hundred silver pieces, the other fifty. ⁴²Neither of them could pay up, and so the banker canceled both debts. Which of the two would be more grateful?”

 

Jesus was well-known for his parables.  But this one seems so simplistic.  Honestly, now, how does this compare with his stories of the Good Samaritan or the Prodigal Son?  And, then, there’s the question he asked Simon.  In our day we might say it was a “no brainer.”

Simon may have thought this at first.  But he may have also known that when a skilled teacher asks a question that seems to have an obvious answer, watch out.  Simon seems to have grasped this.  Listen to his response, I think you can hear a touch of hesitancy as he says, “I suppose the one who had the larger debt canceled.”  I can’t help but wonder if Simon thought that somehow, some way the situation was about to get out of hand.

Congratulating him on his correct answer, Jesus instructs Simon to look at the woman, as if he hadn’t already.  He invites the Pharisee to really see her, to evaluate her actions in light of Simon’s inaction.

Jesus honestly reminds Simon of his failure to observe even the minimum of hospitable behavior. 

You know it was customary in that hot, dusty land to wash the feet of any guest who came to your home.  Sometimes this act was performed by a servant; sometimes, by the host.  In some cases the host simply provided water, basin, and towel so the guest could wash his own feet.  Simon had done none of these things.  Nor had he greeted Jesus with the customary kiss on the cheek—the equivalent of a hearty handshake.  It was a cold reception Jesus received.

After reminding Simon of his lack of hospitality, Jesus points to the woman’s actions.

Whatever motive Simon may have given for her actions, Jesus defines her motivation in one word:  Love. 

Love prompted her to do what Simon had failed to do.  While washing Jesus’ feet had been costly for the woman (she had used her perfume) Simon could have simply dispatched a servant to take care of this matter of hospitality.  He did not.  In fact, washing a guest’s feet was such a routine action that Simon’s failure begs the question: Did he instruct his servants to leave Jesus’ feet unwashed? 

The woman couldn’t have helped but hear some of this conversation.  What was she thinking?  Was she suddenly embarrassed?  Was she afraid she had acted impulsively?  Jesus next words were both for Simon and for her.

Luke 7:47 So I'm telling you that her sins, as many as they are, have been forgiven, and that's why she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven loves little."

48 Then Jesus said to her, "Your sins are forgiven!"

49 Those who were at the table with them began to say among themselves, "Who is this man who even forgives sins?"

50 But Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith had saved you. Go in peace."    Luke 7:47-50 (ISV)

 

To begin with, consider the impact of Jesus’ words on the woman.  Jesus’ parable and his comments about and to the woman suggest there may have been a previous contact in which he offered her the grace of forgiveness. 

Something about Jesus prompted her to rely upon his offer of forgiveness. 

The woman’s faith, not her acts of devotion, led to salvation which resulted in real spiritual peace.  No matter what ghosts of her past might rise up to haunt her, no matter how often the self-righteous treated her with disdain, she had the word of Jesus that her sins were forgiven.  That would give her a peace which could not be shaken.

So, her actions had been prompted by love.  She had acted freely; she had no ulterior motive in expressing her gratitude.  She sought no favor or benefit.  She simply wished to express her devotion and love to the one who had saved her.  She who so freely and openly expressed her devotion challenges us. 

But what did Jesus mean by his other words?  Did Jesus imply that there are degrees of guilt?  Was Simon less a sinner than the unnamed woman?  No, even the teachings of the Pharisees would not have supported that notion. 

Isaiah affirms that “all we like sheep have gone astray” but the Pharisees tended to believe that by keeping their many regulations they had gone far in overcoming the impact of sin in their lives.^[i] 

Haven’t you met people like this?  Because they live by a carefully crafted list of do’s and don’ts they believe they have achieved the moral and spiritual heights. 

But, it’s not that simple, is it?  Even though we snicker at such people we sometimes have our own lists of spiritual accomplishments which we believe set us apart from the ordinary folks who need God’s grace.  So, let me ask you?

Who needs God’s grace more, you and me or the lifer sitting in his cell reading the Bible for the first time, his lips forming each word as he makes his slow progress?   Who needs God’s grace more, you and me or the relieved young executive furtively slipping out of the abortion clinic?  Who needs God’s grace more, you and me or the politician taking the bribe from the representative of the box store that wants to build on land designated as green space?

Intellectually, as good Baptists, we know the answer to those questions.  All of us need God’s grace equally.  In Paul’s words, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God….”  Yet, in answering those questions did you have even a moment of hesitation, a pause in which you thought, “Well, those people are pretty far gone and I never did anything like that so maybe they do need God’s grace more.” 

If such a thought crossed your mind, don’t be surprised; it’s a very human trait to want to think of ourselves as better than someone else.  The danger is in believing it.  Once you’ve rejected the thought for the folly it is, you’re ready to better understand the actions of this woman.

 

CONCLUSION

Remember this party crasher.  Remember, how she went to a party where she didn’t belong to show her gratitude to the Savior.

And, remember that this Savior has invited us all to a banquet of grace, a banquet where none of us belong. 

 

---

^[i] Moises Silva writes:  “Those who followed scrupulously the rabbinic traditions were in danger of concluding that their conduct satisfied God’s demands.  And a muted sense of one’s sin goes hand in hand with a false sense of spiritual security; the need to depend on God’s mercy no longer appears crucial.”  (Marshall Pickering Encyclopedia of the Bible, II:1672).