The parable of The Good Samaritan is one of the most well-known and well-loved of the stories attributed to Jesus. It appears in the Gospel of Luke (and only there, which is a pity, because it's a winner), chapter 10:25-37. Seen as central to Christian ethics, it is also a shining example of core humanist ethics that make no call on a god for validation.
Our poor assault victim lies by the roadside, and is passed by by the religiously observant priest and Levite. They weren't simply ignoring this unfortunate chap because they couldn't be bothered - their religion explicitly forbade them touching a wounded man. They were doing what their god had commanded them to do! This aspect is frequently glossed over.
When Jesus told this story, the barb would not have been lost on his hearers - this is an *antireligious* story. It tells of religion's ability to get between a person and their ethical responsibilities. Who holds people to account? God? No. People? Yes.
The Samaritan, unencumbered by religious nonsense, and acting on pure basic humanistic principles, helps the injured man, and demonstrates the real value of humanistic ethics. Jesus could not have put it plainer than this. He could have told the story about a good Muslim, a good homosexual, a good atheist - all of the above. It is just one episode that justifies non-believers claiming Jesus as a fellow-traveller along that hazardous road to Jericho.
Well, he couldn't have told the story about a "good Muslim" because Muslims hadn't been invented yet!
ReplyDeleteHello Amenhotep, When you responded to my post, I became curious about your thinking. Because of that, I checked your profile and found this blog. I truly like what you have to say. Not because I agree with all of it, but because you are describing the very root of the problem so-called "Christians" have with understanding Christ in the first place. You said, "The Samaritan, unencumbered by religious nonsense, and acting on pure basic humanistic principles, helps the injured man, and demonstrates the real value of humanistic ethics. Jesus could not have put it plainer than this. He could have told the story about a good Muslim, a good homosexual, a good atheist - all of the above. It is just one episode that justifies non-believers claiming Jesus as a fellow-traveller along that hazardous road to Jericho." You are so correct when you say that Jesus could have used other examples of people. In fact, a Samaritan was considered to be the lowest of the low by the Jews. The priest didn't stop because he placed a higher priority or value on keeping his religious duties over and above a fellow humans life. Jesus despised the Temple leaders because they had lost all conciousness of the principles of God's intent. In fact, Jesus and his followers despised and spoke out against religion. Religion was considered to be man keeping the doctrines of man over and above the doctrine of God. If we examine the humanistic qualities of man, then we find a very ugly picture. Recent scientific studies have shown that people are born with three basic abilities which are all selfish by nature. Those abilities are to suck, grasp, and to cry. When observing and experimenting with children, who had never received any human culturing, speach, and other normal teachings from humans, it was found that humans behave in the manner in which they are taught as children. Without any training, they revert to the survival instinct mode, and they can't learn language and social skills after a predetermined age (about 3 to 4 years of age concern language). So, left to themselves, humans behave as wild animals. Now, because of the statement about being a "Humanist", I have to disagree due to the above information I just wrote about human nature. However, I feel that you and I think very much alike. We are attempting find a basic truth from opposite ends of the spectrum and by using different tools and procedures. Nevertheless, we have much the same goal in mind. That being the case, we should walk side by side in discovery. We shouldn't stand apart and trow stones at one another. I appreciate your great understanding and wisdom. I would rather have you as an ally than an enemy. There was once a man in the USA named Fulton who built a steamboat. Many people gathered around to see its first voyage on the river. However, it sunk. After that, they called it "Fulton's Folly". Now, who was wrong? Were the people watching wrong or Fulton? This is why I seek to communicate with others regardless of their personal belief or disbelief in God. If I am correct, then one day people who disbelieve in God will come to believe because their intellect will not allow them to do otherwise. If I am wrong, then my intellect will command me to renouce my views. At the present, I believe absolutely 100% that YHWH and Yeshua are real. I bet my life on it. Even so, let's not allow my or your personal beliefs hinder our quest for the truth.
ReplyDeleteHi Chippamo, and thanks for popping along. I appreciate that a lot of folks like your good self actually *do* believe in god & Jesus and all that - I don't, and I make no bones about it. I don't think Jesus is "alive"; I don't think he was the "Son of God" or anything like that. Indeed, I don't think he was particularly special - what has happened is that a series of stories have sprung up around him, and even some *good* things can be argued to have come from Christianity (although not as many as you think).
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of this blog is to assist people who *are* atheists and agnostics to discuss Jesus and God sensibly within churches, and indeed, to help people deconvert if they are uncomfortable with all that is historically wrong with the Christian myth set.
But thanks for dropping by - we can all still be pals.