Is The Parable Of The Good Samaritan Autobiographical?
For the purpose of this post, we’re going to focus on the moral and ethical teachings of Jesus, not any divine interpretations.
Perhaps the best known of Jesus many parables is that of The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37 NIV):
Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
What is not so well known is that of the four canonical gospels, we have no way of knowing how accurately they reflect the life and teachings of Jesus. We attach narrative connectedness to them because we are conditioned to view them that way. The actual text presents them more as a series of disjointed events rather than a chronology where one thing leads to another.
In the specific incident of the story of the Good Samaritan, it occurs only in the Gospel of Luke and comes after Jesus has been baptized and gone off into the desert to fast and meditate forty days only to be tempted by Satan (Luke 4:1-13).*
Luke’s account ends with Jesus successfully resisting temptation and returning to Galilee to begin. his teaching.
However, a parallel account in Matthew 4:1-11ends with “Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.” (NIV)
Jesus frequently referenced real life events in his teaching, for instance a massacre by the Romans and the collapse of a tower. In Luke’s version of Jesus’ second most famous parable, The Parable Of The Talents, he references obliquely to the historical account of Herod Archelaus’ trip to Rome to be installed as the new client king of Judea and his massacre of three thousand people opposed to his rule upon his return.
Likewise, the lesser known parables of The Lost Coin (Luke 15:8-10), The Persistent Widow (Luke 18:1-8) and The Widow’s Mite (Mark 12:41–44 and Luke 21:1–4) suggest personal first hand knowledge of the events behind the teachings.
I contend that those three mini-parables are based on real events that happened to someone Jesus knew personally -- perhaps his mother Mary herself (presumed to be widowed by the time of Jesus ministry since her husband Joseph is no longer in the picture).
I further contend that the Parable of The Good Samaritan is based in whole or in part to something that happened to him. At some point after his baptism but before returning to Galilee, Jesus was seized and beaten by robbers in the desert, left to die of exposure only to be saved by a generous Samaritan.
His encounter with Satan -- while interpreted as a literal event by many Christians -- may have been a vision caused either by his fasting or by being attacked.
Just because a vision didn’t happen in real life doesn’t make it any less valid.
And being beaten by robbers then saved by Samaritans would be a humbling experience for someone who just emerged from the waters of the Jordan river believing himself to be blessed by God.
A literal robbery / beating / rescue is not the sort of thing that would attract audiences who might then apply the teachings they learned in their lives.
But retold in more symbolic terms? No problems there.
In the Bible, the term “angels” may mean supernatural entities or righteous human beings.
Jesus acceptance of the Samaritan people as seen in the story of his encounter with the woman at the well (John 4:4–42) indicates a radical shift from the way most Judeans viewed their neighboring cousins to one of unconditional love and acceptance.
The gospels depict Jesus not as one who came with teachings written in stone but rather someone capable of learning and adapting to new information.
His encounter with the Syrophoenician woman (Mark 7:24–30 and Matthew 15:21–28) indicate an early standoffishness to gentiles, one replaced by a more universal attitude after she questioned him for refusing her request for her daughter’s exorcism.
While he praised the Roman centurion for his faith in Matthew 8:5–13 and Luke 7:1–10, as noted earlier we have no knowledge of when and where these stories entered into the test of what became known as the New Testament.
The story of the Syrophoenician woman may be an example he used to help followers understand his radical departure from previous Jewish teachings of exclusivity.
In that case, she might be regarded as an angel as well, one who provided Jesus with a convenient off ramp he could use to blunt criticism and make his message more palatable to a culture with anti-Roman and anti-Samaritan hatred already deeply ingrained in them.
Just remember, folks, it’s all bullshit if we don’t love one another.
© Buzz Dixon
* “Forty” is often used in Biblical accounts to indicate a range of numbers, much the same as we might say “dozens” or “hundreds” without being specific.