No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Story of the Samaritan and the Innkeeper (Luke 10:30-35): A Study in Character Rehabilitation
Abstract
The aphorism 'context is everything' has been a guiding principle in many studies of Jesus' parabolic sayings. This is true, for instance, of studies attempting to recover a parable's significance in relation to the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, or in relation to its literary placement and function, or in relation to its polyvalent potential. It is also true of this study, which examines Jesus' narrative of the Samaritan—usually referred to as the 'parable of the good Samaritan'. It suggests that, when the Samaritan story is placed within a certain contextual configuration, its narrative features align themselves in ways that have either been conspicuously neglected or consciously avoided in the history of the story's interpretation. Rather than neglecting or avoiding the significance of these narrative features, this essay seeks to exploit their interpretative significance in a fresh manner, entertaining possibilities of meaning beyond the Lukan interpretative framework. In particular, consideration is given to the relationship between the Samaritan and the innkeeper as representing an exceptional partnership that testifies to the reign of God in making each party vulnerable to loss while promoting goodness towards others.
... Nonetheless, to somewhat the audience's surprise, an ignominious Samaritan, who performs as an example of one who loves his neighbor, comes to help the victim by bringing him to a sheltered place (cf., Luke 9:58b) and by instructing the innkeeper to spare no expense in his treatment (cf,. Luke 2:7b; refer to Longenecker, 2009 for a characteristic interpretation on the innkeeper). However, it should be noted that the injured man is seemingly beaten unconscious by the robbers who also steal his clothes. ...
From an integrative approach of parable interpretation that combines ethical, evolutionary, historical, and psychological perspectives, the current research empirically examined the purely theorized assumption elucidating the behaviors of the priest, Levite, and Samaritan in the good Samaritan parable (Luke 10:25-37) by the regulatory focus theory (Lu, 2017b). In one experiment conducted during the COVID-19 outbreak, 93 Polish participants were randomly assigned to a simulated vignette of the good Samaritan parable where either the prevention or promotion regulatory focus was manipulated. The results confirmed a certain favorable tendency to offer quasi-realistic help in both the regulatory focus conditions. The finding highlights a dynamic association in goal
pursuit motivation and prosocial behavior in a pandemic context regarding the good Samaritan parable. The current study is among rare empirical research which reflects a challenge people respond to offer help in simulated scenarios as original as the good Samaritan parable.
... 14 To this evidence, in using the work done by Casson on travel in the ancient world, he adds an inscription found in an inn in Pompeii, criticising an innkeeper for watering down his wine too much, 15 and a remark made by the 2nd-century physician Galen that he knows innkeepers who have been caught selling human flesh as pork (see Casson 1994:214-215). How does this negative depiction of innkeepers in the ancient world contribute to the meaning of the parable, according to Longenecker (2009)? In the parable: the innkeeper is one who notably steps out of caricature, just as the Samaritan steps out of caricature throughout 10:33-35. ...
This article traces the meaning of κατάλυμά and πανδοχεῖον in available Roman-Egypt papyri, the LXX, early-Jewish literature, and Greek writings to determine the meaning of πανδοχεῖον [inn] used in Luke 10:34. It is argued that a lexical study of κατάλυμά and πανδοχεῖον and available information on travel in the ancient world indicate that there is no evidence for the so-called non-commercial inns in the ancient world and that commercial inns and innkeepers, in principle, were all 'bad'. In conclusion, the implications of this understanding of πανδοχεῖον and πανδοκεύς (Lk 10:34, 35) for the possible intended meaning of the parable are discussed, a conclusion that begs further research regarding the identity of the protagonist in the parable.
... In the parable, Jesus describes that a priest and a Levite who are journeying away on the Jericho road from Jerusalem sequentially pass by a wounded man and do nothing for him. Nevertheless, to the audience's surprise, a despised Samaritan acting as an example of one who loves his neighbor comes to aid the victim, furthermore brings him to a place of shelter (cf., Lk. 9:58b, " The Son of Man has no place to lay his head " ), and instructs the innkeeper to spare no expense in his treatment (cf., Lk. 2:7b, " There was no room for them in the inn " ; see also[4]for a characteristic interpretation on the innkeeper). It is noteworthy that the wounded man looks seemingly like unconscious and unidentifiable since he is stripped by the robbers. ...
This article delineates a novel argument for interpreting the actions of the priest, Levite, and Samaritan in the good Samaritan parable (Lk. 10:25-37) from social-scientific ideas relating to regulatory focus theory and from the perspective of behavioral decision making under uncertainty. Based on an exegesis on their actions, the paper encompasses particularistic perspectives from history, theology, and psychology to cast doubt on the reasons why the priest and Levite do not help the wounded stranger, but the Samaritan helps him.
Healthcare has an impact on everyone, and healthcare funding decisions shape how and what healthcare is provided. In this book, Stephen Duckett outlines a Christian, biblically grounded, ethical basis for how decisions about healthcare funding and priority-setting ought to be made. Taking a cue from the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37), Duckett articulates three ethical principles drawn from the story: compassion as a motivator; inclusivity, or social justice as to benefits; and responsible stewardship of the resources required to achieve the goals of treatment and prevention. These are principles, he argues, that should underpin a Christian ethic of healthcare funding. Duckett's book is a must for healthcare professionals and theologians struggling with moral questions about rationing in healthcare. It is also relevant to economists interested in the strengths and weaknesses of the application of their discipline to health policy.
In this article, I survey recent trends in Samaritan studies, with a particular focus on biblical studies and the interactions of Samaritan Israelites with other religious traditions. While remaining entrenched in discussion of the origins of Samaritans, scholars have firmly embraced the idea of processual Samaritan identity, emerging over time and in a non-genealogical sense alongside and interwoven with Judean/Jewish self-definition. Extensive work clusters, in particular, at three nodes: the study of Hebrew-language scriptures, archaeological excavations, and the remodelling of identity-production in a constructivist form. I also sketch out the directions in which the field is moving, with growing and productive emphasis on Aramaic, Arabic, and late antiquity. Finally, I identify some of the quirks of Samaritan studies as it might be encountered, in particular a continued effort to salvage Samaritans for biblical studies, somewhat intermittent interdisciplinarity, and practices of engagement with Samaritan Israelites themselves.
Hospitality in the new normal era has brought new problems because the actions of hospitality towards other people are at risk of corona virus. Therefore the construction of hospitality needs to be reformulated amid a changing context. This was done through a study of the text of Luke 10: 25-37 with the historical critical method. From the results of the study is found several theological points. First, hospitality must be based on compassion which will enable a person to empathize for strangers although faced with a difficult situation. Second, acts of hospitality need to be done collaboratively across groups, ethnicity and religions facing of an increase in the communities affected by Covid-19. Third, the construction of hospitality need to be done with a digital technology media approach that functions intertwined with human interaction and is beneficial in presenting the hospitality of God to anyone penetrating geographical boundaries.Keywords: hospitality, compassion, collaborative, digital technology. Abstrak: Hospitalitas di era new normal telah membawa persoalan baru karena tindakan hospitalitas terhadap orang lain menjadi beresiko pada penularan virus corona. Karenanya konstruksi hospitalitas perlu dirumuskan kembali di tengah konteks yang sudah berubah. Hal itu dilakukan melalui penelitian teks Lukas 10:25-37 dengan metode historis kritis. Dari hasil penelitian ditemukan beberapa pokok teologis. Pertama, hospitalitas harus berpijak pada belas kasih yang akan memampukan seseorang untuk berempati terhadap orang asing walau diperhadapkan pada situasi yang sulit. Kedua, tindakan hospitalitas perlu dilakukan secara kolaboratif lintas kelompok, etnik, dan agama dalam menghadapi meningkatnya masyarakat yang terdampak Covid-19. Ketiga, konstruksi hospitalitas perlu dilakukan dengan pendekatan media tehnologi digital yang berfungsi terjalinnya interaksi antar manusia dan bermanfaat dalam menghadirkan keramahtamahan Allah pada siapapun menembus batas-batas geografis.Kata kunci: hospitalitas, belas kasih, kolaboratif, tehnologi digital.
Border-crossing is a defining subject in the contemporary field of postcolonial studies. Situating the parable of the Good Samaritan within this landscape, the present study engages the dynamism of border-crossing in the popular parable of the Good Samaritan. While the parable of the Good Samaritan has been studied from varieties of methodologies and perspectives, the mechanics of border markings – within the fictionality of border space – has generally escaped this study. Using social identity theory in this direction, the work probes the dynamics of group border markings in the characterization of this story – and the significance of this border polemics in the mapping of Luke-Acts. Consequently, the paper offers fresh perspectives to this popular parable in the different negotiations of border markings and the polemics of otherness in this story.
p>Autor, texto y lector son categorías todavía desarticuladas en los actuales estudios bíblicos. La exégesis se encuentra en la hora del lector y tiende a fortalecer la articulación entre comprensión y explicación del texto. El artículo se orienta a la consideración del papel del lector en la interpretación bíblica y se focaliza en las estrategias utilizadas por el autor con su texto, para involucrar al lector en el mundo del relato. Texto y autor se erigen al mismo tiempo como límites del rol del lector en la interpretación del texto.</p
Citing the difficulties of establishing a unity between parable and frame in Luke 18.1–8, this article argues that Luke has significant themes of justice and social transformation that could be used to frame the parable of the audacious widow (18.2–5). In the antecedent source of Luke's widow tradition, the widow is characteristically without a voice in her community. Ironically, Luke has effectively silenced the story's prophetic voice for justice with the parable's frame. However, the parable can find its voice through alternative framing within the gospel, for example, the Magnificat. If the parable (vv. 2–5) has independent force within the same community of the gospel's production, what possible tensions does a widely acknowledged dissonance in vv. 1–8 reflect at its point of production? What implications might these tensions have for subsequent parable interpretation?