While much of social media has been embroiled in exceedingly intellectual arguments recently, like whether Elon Musk's hand gesture necessarily codifies him as an official member of the Nazi Party, I've found myself drawn in by a dispute that seemed to me far more edifying for the human soul.
Daily Wire reporter Megan Basham, an outspoken evangelical Christian writer, posted her thoughts on the famous parable Jesus told of the "Good Samaritan" a few days ago.
As a student of the Word, I found her articulation of its meaning to be a breath of fresh air in a culture that works overtime to neuter the spiritual emphasis of Christ's teachings, fashioning them into nothing but handy little moralizing lessons in the style of Gandhi or Confucius. To be sure, it's not that Jesus's teachings don't provide good moral precepts to learn and follow, it's that there is always a deeper layer of spiritual meaning attached to them that we so often miss. To that end, I wasn't surprised that there were those responding to Basham who had seemingly never considered her understanding of the parable. But I was blown away at their hostility.
Some organization (or individual) calling itself "The New Evangelicals" actually said Basham's explanation was "abhorrent."
Abhorrent? It's hateful and detestable to say no one shows the love for neighbor necessary to earn salvation, and thus we need a Savior? Isn't that the entire premise of Christianity? Sociology professor and progressive Christian activist Samuel Perry was equally disgusted with Basham's take:
Maybe I don't spend enough time on social media to know if there is bad blood between Perry and Basham, but what in the world motivates this kind of outrage about an otherwise rational assessment of Christ's teaching? And why would it be implicit in Basham's acknowledgment that we are incapable of showing the kind of perfect love exhibited by the Good Samaritan, that we aren't supposed to still try? That's what Perry curiously concludes when he accuses Basham of, "transparently seeking to get out of the Christian responsibility to serve all humanity, including those outside of our ethno-religious tribes."
Where did Basham say that, or even imply it?
The truth is that Perry's (and The New Evangelical's) interpretation of the parable is sound. As is Basham's. The former is correctly reading the surface-level truth of Christ's teaching, while the latter is correctly identifying its deeper spiritual meaning. A parallel to this principle would be one who reads the account of Abraham being asked by God to sacrifice his son Isaac. The surface-level truth reveals a test of faith for Abraham. The deeper spiritual meaning reveals a foreshadowing of God sacrificing His own Son a few thousand of years later. Both understandings of the event are accurate and add value to our spiritual development. The same is true here in Luke 10.
Consider the question that prompted Jesus to tell the story of the Good Samaritan. A young lawyer who was convinced of his own righteousness asked Jesus, "What must I do to inherit eternal life?"
He was asking how to earn salvation.
I'm hopeful that both Perry and The New Evangelicals know the entire purpose behind Jesus' incarnation, His coming to earth, was to rectify the desperate situation humanity faced. We were singularly unable to save ourselves. No individual or corporate action could attain to the perfect standard of righteousness God demands.
Knowing He was here to do what mankind could not do for themselves - bring salvation - Jesus tells the lawyer this famous account of a despised foreigner, regarded by the Jews as a half-breed pagan, going to extraordinary lengths to care for a victim of robbery. He not only bandaged the wounds and paid for room at a nearby shelter, he covered the equivalent of a two-month room and board stay, including medical care. He did all this for a man whose own people, including religious leaders, had passed him by.
After telling this story, Jesus answers the lawyer by saying, "go and do likewise."
So, was Jesus teaching us to "serve all of humanity, including those outside of our ethno-centrist tribes?" Yes, I think that's clear. He chose the characters of His parable with intent. There's no question Jesus is commending this kind of lavish, selfless, all-encompassing love towards others - even those outside our own community - as righteous. True followers of Jesus, then, will set aside prejudices and show cross-cultural, abundant love and compassion for our neighbor. And Christ makes evident that term "neighbor" applies to anyone we encounter in the human family.
That's the kind of perfect love God's law requires.
Can anyone live up to it? Of course not. Perhaps progressive, social-justice types like Professor Perry believe they do, but ask yourself whether you can see them showing this type of selfless love toward say, Megan Basham. They can't even manage to engage her understanding of Scripture respectfully and charitably on social media.
Basham's conclusion is convicting and convincing: "Only by taking on the righteousness of Christ, could we ever meet" that standard.
So, while the parable of the Good Samaritan does, indeed, provide a powerful example of the kind of perfect love we should strive to show to others, it is also a reminder of how far we are from living that way. If our hope of salvation depends on doing so, we're out of luck.
Thankfully, we have Christ, a Good Samaritan despised and rejected by the very men He came to save, whose bottomless, selfless love provides us all the perfect righteousness we so profoundly lack, but so desperately need.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Not the Bee or any of its affiliates.
