Luke 10:36 - Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible

Which now of these three, &c.— Great pains have been taken by some, so to adjust this case, as that it might yield a proper answer to the lawyer's question. He asked, Who is my neighbour? That is, "Who am I obliged to love as myself?" So that our Lord, say they, ought to have determined the extent and right of neighbourhood, and thence deduced the obligations of love and assistance: whereas, the case supposes the love and assistance, and thence infers the relation of neighbourhood. The priest and the Levite were not neighbour's, because they did not assist the wounded man: the Samaritan was his neighbour, because he shewed kindness to him. And if this be to, that no man is our neighbour, till we have either shewed or received kindness from him, we cannot then from the right of neighbourhood infer the obligations of love; but must determine, from the mutual exercise of love, the notion and extent of neighbourhood. And if this be the case, no man can offend against the law of loving his neighbour; for if none are ourneighbours but those whom we love, then every man certainly loves his neighbour. But if we consider the case fairly, and view it in its due light, this supposed difficulty will vanish. The question was asked by the lawyer out of a desire to justify himself. He had learned to call no man hisneighbour who was not of the same stock and religion with himself: Samaritans he expressly hated, and justified his hatred because they were dissenters from the true worship, and despisers of the temple at Jerusalem. This great error our Lord was to wrest from him, which was not to be done by combating his prejudices, and arguing upon the true sense and meaning of the law: the lawyer, not unaccustomed to such exercises, would have held up the dispute, and stood resolute against any such convictions. Our Saviour therefore puts him a case; and states it so, that his prejudices were all shut out, and could have no influence in the determination. A Jew therefore is put into the place of distress: A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves. Here could be no exception taken against the person. Had the Samaritan been placed in the same case, and his calamities painted in the most moving colours, he would have found no pity from the Jews who would have excepted to his religion, and thought himself very much in the right to have been an enemy to the enemy of God: but, when one of his own nation was represented in misery, he saw reason in every thing that was done for his relief. A priest and a Levite are said to pass by and neglect him: these persons stood in all those relations to the distressed, which the lawyer owned to be the just bonds and ties of neighbourhood: they wereof his kindred, and they met at the same altar to worship the same God; he could not therefore but condemn their want of bowels to their brother. A Samaritan is represented as passing by, and shewing the greatest tenderness and compassion to the poor Jew. This could not but be approved: even the prejudice of the lawyer carried himin these circumstances to a right judgment; for knowing how inveterately the Jew hated the Samaritan, he could not but the more admire and approve the Samaritan's kindness to the Jew. Upon this case our Lord puts him to determine which was neighbour to the man in distress; or, which is the same thing, which of the three acted most agreeably to the law of God, commanding that we should love our neighbour as ourself? The lawyer answers, He that shewed mercy; confessing that the Samaritan had fulfilled the law, which was condemning the Jewish exposition, and his own prejudices. For if a Jew was rightly forbidden to shew kindness to a Samaritan, because of the difference in religion between them, the same reason made it unlawful for a Samaritan to assist a Jew. Our Saviour approves his judgment, and bids him only apply it to himself, Go thou, and do likewise; that is, "Since you commend the Samaritan for acting like a neighbour to the Jew, do you learn to act like a neighbour to the Samaritan;" for this is the true force of the word likewise. For a Jew to be kind to a Jew only, is not to do like the good Samaritan, who was kind, not to a Samaritan only, but to a Jew also. And thus, we see, the case led to a full determination of the question proposed, and shewed that no restrictions were to be laid upon the law of God; that even those whom the lawyer accounted as his worst enemies, the very Samaritans, were intitled to the benefit of it, and ought to be treated with the love and kindness which is due to our neighbours.